DISTRIBUTION – SDL No. 167
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
i
j
k
l
m
n
o
p
q
r
s
t
u
v
w
x
y
z
A
B
x
x
x
x
x
C
x
x
D
x
x
E
x
x
F
G
H
NON-STANDARD DISTRIBUTION:
COMDTPUB P16700.4
NVIC 02-16
13 APR 2016
NAVIGATION AND VESSEL INSPECTION CIRCULAR NO. 02-16
Subj: INSPECTION GUIDANCE FOR SAIL RIGGING AND MASTS ON INSPECTED
SAILING VESSELS
Ref: (a) Subchapter T - Small Passenger Vessels Under 100 Gross Tons:
46 CFR 176.402 (c)(1), 176.700, 176.800, 176.802.(a)(3), 177.202 (b)(12) and 177.330
(b) Subchapter K – Small Passenger Vessels Carrying more than 150 Passengers or
Overnight Accommodations for more than 49 Passengers:
46 CFR 115.402 (c)(1), 115.700, 115.802 (a)(3); 116.202 (b)(14) and 116.330
(c) Subchapter R – Sailing School Vessels
46 CFR 169.221 (a), 169.222, 169.203, 169.239, 169.305 (a)(13), (14) and 169.309
1. PURPOSE. This Circular provides guidance to vessel owners, riggers, marine surveyors,
other marine service providers, and Coast Guard marine inspectors regarding inspection of
sail rigging, masts, and associated components for inspected sailing vessels and the use of
preventative maintenance as a good marine practice.
2. ACTION.
a. Officers-in-Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMIs), vessel owners and operators, or their
representatives, are encouraged to take advantage of the procedures and guidelines
detailed in this Circular. Area Commanders, District Commanders, Sector Commanders,
Commanding Officer Marine Safety Center, and OCMIs are encouraged to apprise
industry representatives of this Circular and apply its provisions appropriately. This
Circular will be distributed by electronic means only and is available on the World Wide
Web at http://www.uscg.mil/hq/cg5/nvic/default.asp.
b. Coast Guard Marine Inspectors should refer to the enclosed guidance when conducting
inspections on sailing vessels. It is important to follow the recommended frequencies of
maintenance and inspections. Excessive frequencies (e.g., for unstepping the rig) may
Commandant
United States Coast Guard
US Coast Guard Stop 7501
2703 Martin Luther King Jr Ave, SE
Washington, DC 20593
-7501
Staff Symbol:
CG-CVC-1
Phone: (202)
372-1251
Fax: (202)
372-1216
Email:
CG-CVC-1@uscg.mil
U.S. Department
of
Homeland
Security
United States
Coast Guard
NAVIGATION AND VESSEL INSPECTION CIRCULAR NO. 02-16
2
impose unnecessary expenses for the owner/operator without appreciable findings.
Enclosure (1), along with its appendices, provides guidance for the purpose of assisting
vessel owners/operators and U.S. Coast Guard personnel with the inspections and
recommended documentation of maintenance for sail rigging and masts on inspected
sailing vessels.
c. The use of this guidance will assist sailing vessel owner/operators to adequately assess
the safe condition of their sail rigging systems through the use of a documented
preventative maintenance plan.
3. DIRECTIVE(S) AFFECTED. None.
4. BACKGROUND.
a. In 2005, the entire rig of a U.S. tall ship was carried away as a result of a single, failed
component in the standing rigging; fortunately, no injuries or fatalities occurred.
b. In 2006 and 2007, two separate dismastings occurred aboard Coast Guard inspected
catamarans in the Hawaii region; each tragically resulted in a passenger fatality. Post-
casualty investigation analysis revealed rigging equipment failure as the primary causal
factor in both cases (activity numbers 2833864 and 2895732; accessible at
http://cgmix.uscg.mil/IIR/IIRSearch.aspx). Following these serious marine casualties, a
comprehensive review and inspection of the Hawaiian fleet of 59 sailing vessels was
conducted where approximately 20% were found to have significant mast and rigging
deficiencies. These deficiencies included excessive corrosion, fractures in the masts,
missing bolts, spreaders, and mast fittings.
c. Post-casualty analysis and follow-up inspections highlighted the need for the Coast
Guard, in collaboration with the commercial sailing vessel industry, to develop a
standardized inspection, examination, and maintenance regime for sail vessel rigging
nationwide to improve safety of commercial sailing vessel operations.
d. In 2008, after a third catamaran dismasting, Sector Honolulu along with the U.S. Coast
Guard Headquarters Traveling Inspection Staff led a workshop with local sailing vessel
owners, operators, rigging suppliers, riggers, naval architects and marine surveyors to
develop an inspection regime for sail vessel rigging. As a result of that collaborative
effort, Sector Honolulu Inspection Note #13 dated October 16, 2008, established a
recommended inspection and examination regime for sail vessel rigging that then became
the standard for the nation’s inspected sailing vessel fleet.
e. To date, there have been 37 reportable marine casualties involving inspected sailing
vessels, 18 of which have involved masts, spars and rigging failures on both
contemporary and traditional rigs. Dismastings were mostly attributed to, but not
exclusively limited to multi-hulled sailing vessels.
NAVIGATION AND VESSEL INSPECTION CIRCULAR NO. 02-16
3
5. DISCUSSION.
a. Sail Rigging Inspections. Under 46 CFR 176.802(a)(3), 115.802 (a)(3) and 169.309
regular rigging inspection is already prescribed; however, the regulations do not establish
specific time intervals for unstepping the mast. Given the high risk for and potential fatal
consequences of a rigging failure, preventative maintenance is critically important for
sailing vessels. The basis for any preventative maintenance plan is a robust examination
regime to determine, with some level of confidence, component service life and
replacement intervals in order to prevent equipment failures and related marine
casualties.
b. Condition of the Sail Rigging. Sailing vessels and their rigging are made up of a
complex system that must stay intact and function properly else risk catastrophic failure
that could result in a significant marine casualty. Sail rigging is also exposed to a
complex variety of dynamic stresses in service. Variable operating conditions such as
climate, wind strength, and weather and sea state, among other influences, imposes
dynamic stresses that affect the working life of the rig and its components. Corrosion is
also ever present based on materials used and exposure to the salinity of the marine
environment. Proactive and thorough periodic examinations by vessel owners and
operators are essential to monitor wear and corrosion, determine service life and
replacement cycles, and help identify potential rigging failures before they occur. There
may not always be obvious visual cues to prompt replacement or renewal of rigging
equipment. Continuous monitoring, with an understanding of the equipment in use, is
essential to maintain safe operating conditions.
c. Vessel Specific Rigging Maintenance Regime. The inspection and maintenance regime
set forth in Enclosure (1) and its appendices are intended to assist vessel owners and
operators in determining the reasonable service life and replacement interval of rigging
components as based on the vessel’s operations, environmental conditions, vessel type
(i.e., monohull vs catamaran) and other factors.
d. This NVIC incorporates the best practices for sail vessel rigging of all types and sizes
based on input from sailing vessel operators, Coast Guard marine inspectors, riggers, and
marine surveyors. Publishing this guidance enhances consistency with the inspection
process and helps sustain proper rigging maintenance and awareness in the commercial
sailing fleet.
6. DISCLAIMER. This guidance is not a substitute for applicable legal requirements, nor is
itself a rule. It is not intended to nor does it impose legally binding requirements on any
party. It represents the Coast Guard’s current thinking on this topic and may assist industry,
mariners, the general public, and the Coast Guard, as well as other Federal and state
regulators, in applying statutory and regulatory requirements.
7. ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECT AND IMPACT CONSIDERATIONS.
a. The development of this NVIC and the general policies contained within it have been
thoroughly reviewed by the originating office in conjunction with the Office of
Environmental Management, and are categorically excluded (CE) under current USCG
NAVIGATION AND VESSEL INSPECTION CIRCULAR NO. 02-16
CE#
33
from further environmental analysis, in accordance with Section 2.B.2. and
Figure
2-1
of
the National Environmental Policy Act Implementing Procedures and
Policy for Considering Environmental Impacts, COMDTINST M16475.l (series).
b.
This directive will not have any
of
the following: significant cumulative impacts on the
human environment; substantial controversy or substantial change to existing
environmental conditions; or inconsistencies with any Federal, State, or local laws or
administrative determinations relating
to
the environment. All future specific actions
resulting from the general policies in this NVIC must be individually evaluated for
compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), DHS and Coast Guard
NEPA policy, and compliance with all other environmental mandates.
8.
DISTRIBUTION: No paper distribution will be made
of
this Circular. An electronic version
will be located on the following Coast Guard website: http://www.uscg.mil/hq/cg5/nvic/.
9.
RECORDS MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS. This Circular has been thoroughly
reviewed during the directives clearance process, and it has been determined there are
no
further records scheduling requirements, in accordance with Federal Records Act, 44 U.S.C.
3101 et seq., NARA requirements, and Information and Life Cycle Management Manual,
COMDTINST M5212.12 (series). This policy does not create significant or substantial
change to existing records management requirements.
10.
FORMS/REPORTS. None.
11.
REQUEST FOR CHANGES. Recommended changes to this Circular and questions
regarding implementation should be directed
to
the Domestic Vessel Compliance Policy
Division (CG-CVC-1) at CG-CVC-l@uscg.mil.
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard
Assistant Commandant for Prevention Policy
Encl (1): Inspection Guidance for Sail Rigging and Masts on Inspected Sailing Vessels
4
Enclosure (1) to NVIC 02-16
1
Inspection Guidance for Sail Rigging and Masts
on Inspected Sailing Vessels
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 3
I. OVERVIEW 4
a. General 4
b. Variables to Consider: Rigging Equipment Service Life/Replacement Intervals 4
II. PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE PLAN (RIGGING INSPECTION REGIME) 4
a. Written Maintenance Plan 4
b. Contents 5
c. Documenting Exams/Maintenance 5
III. INSPECTION OF SAIL RIGGING 6
a. Coast Guard Inspections 6
b. Third Party Rigging Surveys 7
c. Supplementary Inspection Techniques Beyond Visual Examinations 10
d. Guidance for Inspection and Replacement of Standing Rigging and Components 10
e. Sail Furling Systems 14
f. Running Rigging 15
g. Unstepping the Rig 16
h. Sail Condition 17
i. Recommended Emergency Safety Equipment 18
IV. SAILING VESSEL DESIGN AND PLAN REVIEW 18
a. The Marine Safety Center (MSC) – Plan Review 18
b. Sail Vessel Plan Review – New Construction or Initial Certification 18
c. Sail Vessel Plan Review – Rigging Repair or Modification 19
d. Modification or Changes to Rigging or Sail Plan 20
V. APPENDICES
(1) Rigging Key Components List
(2) Rigging Inventory/Preventive Maintenance Inspection Template (Sample)
Enclosure (1) to NVIC 02-16
2
(3) Third Party Rigging Survey (Sample A)
(4) Third Party Rigging Survey (Sample B)
(5) Recommended References
(6) Preventive Maintenance Cleaning for Stainless Steel Rigging Components
(7) Typical Stainless Steel Cable End Fittings
(8) Corrosion Inspection Points
(9) Pathways to Spar and Rigging Failure (Not Including Operator Error)
(10) Wood Spar Grade Standards
Enclosure (1) to NVIC 02-16
3
Inspection Guidance for Sail Rigging and Masts
on Inspected Sailing Vessels
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This NVIC was developed as the result of over six years of rigging awareness and lessons
learned in the field aboard the inspected sail vessel fleet, including the implementation of
Honolulu Inspection Note #13, incorporation of sail vessel training at the Marine Inspector’s
Course in Yorktown, beneficial input from experienced sailing professionals, as well as
commercially-available rigging inspection training created specifically for Marine Inspectors.
Special thanks to the following industry partners and Coast Guard personnel who assisted in the
evolution of this document by providing lessons learned on best practices and real-life
experiences.
Captain Jonathan Boulware, Tall Ships America - Newport, RI
Captain Bert Rogers, Tall Ships America - Newport, RI
Captain Les Bolton, The Spar Shop, Gray’s Harbor Historical Seaport - Aberdeen, WA
Mr. John Koon, Tradewinds Marine Services - Honolulu, HI
M. Brion Toss, Brion Toss Yacht Riggers - Port Townsend, WA
Mr. Roger Hatfield, Gold Coast Yachts - St. Croix, USVI
Mr. John Marples, Marples Marine - Penobscot, ME
Mr. Kurt Hughes, Kurt Hughes Sailing Designs – Seattle, WA
Mr. Gino Morelli, Morelli & Melvin Design and Engineering - Newport Beach, CA
Mr. Pete Melvin, Morelli & Melvin Design and Engineering-– Newport Beach, CA
Mr. Buzz Ballenger, Ballenger Spar Systems, Inc - Watsonville, CA
Mr. Ty Goss, Navtec Rigging Solutions - Guilford, CT
Mr. Mark Hudson, New Wind Corporation - Long Beach, CA
The Maine Windjammers Association - Camden, ME
The Passenger Vessel Association - Alexandria, VA
LCDR Greg Schultz, Sector Honolulu, HI
LCDR John Taylor, Commandant (CG-CVC-1)
LT Mark Neeland, USCG Marine Safety Center – Small Vessel Branch (H-1)
LT Nicole Auth, Sector Honolulu, HI
Marc Cruder, CDR (Ret.), Commandant (CG-5P-TI)
Enclosure (1) to NVIC 02-16
4
I. Overview
a. General: This NVIC provides inspection guidance that is specific to sail rigging
equipment for inspected commercial sailing vessels. The goal of this inspection guidance
is to ensure critical components of the sail rigging are replaced on a routine schedule
before they experience failure.
Note: When there is a component failure that results in a reportable marine casualty, as
defined in 46 CFR 4.05-1, the owner or operator shall notify the nearest Coast Guard
Sector or Marine Safety Unit.
b. Variables to Consider: Rigging Equipment Service Life/Replacement Intervals: There are
many variables in rig design, component materials and attachment methods that should
be considered when determining equipment service life and replacement intervals. These
intervals for sail rigging and components vary according to vessel design characteristics
including the following:
i. Mast/spar construction material (e.g., solid, laminated, hollow/wood, steel, aluminum,
carbon fiber, composite);
ii. Mast installation (e.g., keel or deck stepped, fixed, rotating or unstayed without
standing rigging);
iii. Sail rig type and or technology (e.g., marconi, gaff or square rigged);
iv. Standing rig system complexity (e.g., minimally vs. heavily stayed);
v. Vessel type (e.g., monohull or multi-hull);
vi. Service route variables and local wind/sea state (e.g., protected vs. exposed waters);
vii. Frequency and duration of operation (e.g., length of cruise; number of trips per day;
hours under sail per week, month, or year);
viii. Design safety factor and review process (e.g., rig pedigree, load assumptions and/or
independent engineering review);
ix. Nature of operations (e.g., high performance or low stress); and
x. Area of operations in terms of propensity for corrosion (e.g., heat, salinity and
climate).
II. Preventative Maintenance Plan (Rigging Inspection Regime):
a. Written Maintenance Plan: All inspected sailing vessel owner/operators should have a
written Preventive Maintenance Plan (PMP) that specifically addresses their vessel’s sail
rigging equipment and components. Maintenance of the rigging is the most critical
Enclosure (1) to NVIC 02-16
5
factor toward ensuring safe operation of the sail rigging and its components, and thus
helps ensure the safety of passengers and crew. The PMP, when carried out, will be
comprised of inspection of the sail rigging components per Section III below.
b. Contents: A PMP, should include, at a minimum:
i. General Description: A description of the sailing vessel, including the type of rig,
drawings and/or photographs of the vessel itself.
ii. Examination/Maintenance Schedule: The PMP should include the maintenance
schedule of the rigging and associated equipment. These maintenance examinations
should establish routine as well as very detailed examination protocol; everything
from deck-level rigging prior to sailing, to the cycle of regular inspections aloft, and
including comprehensive annual inspections with component disassembly as needed.
iii. Inventory of Rigging Components: The PMP should include an inventory of all
rigging components, including the age of component, size, type of material, and a
replacement schedule for all rig components based on inspection results, service
history, and manufacturer or designer recommendations. Not all components have
the same service life in all conditions. Due consideration should be given to the
service, rig type, level of maintenance, sizing and other factors as appropriate
regarding the replacement of or the renewal intervals for rigging components. The
variable factors discussed in paragraph I.b. should also be taken into account.
iv. PMP examples: Several examples are provided as Appendices to this Enclosure to
assist owners/operators with their PMP. Appendix (1) provides a generic list of key
components that should be addressed in a PMP. Appendix (2) contains a sample
template of a rigging equipment inventory document and a general inspection outline
for the rigging equipment on a sailing catamaran. The Appendices are for general
information and may not apply to all rigs.
c. Documenting Exams/Maintenance: All rigging examinations and maintenance conducted
by the vessel crew and/or third party rigging surveyor should be documented (e.g.,
written reports, surveys, or photos). Documentation of exams and maintenance should
include documenting the condition of equipment, maintenance performed to the
equipment, and the replacement of equipment. This information is especially helpful in
assessing life-cycle trends and objective evidence for revising rigging component
maintenance and replacement schedules.
i. Tall Ships America (TSA)
1
– Recommended Protocol for Rig Inspection and
Template for Rig Inspection Checklist: In 2012, Tall Ships America published a
1
Tall Ships America is an international group of over 150 sailing vessels that, at the time of this NVIC’s publication, has in its
membership over 60 inspected U.S. flag vessels certificated for underway operations, in addition to a number of Moored
Attraction Vessels as well as registered naval vessels from various countries. As an organization, they have been a resource
supporting Coast Guard efforts to understand rigging inspection issues in the traditionally rigged fleet.
Enclosure (1) to NVIC 02-16
6
“Recommended Protocol for Rig Inspection and Template for Rig Inspection
Checklist.” This protocol is designed to assist member vessel operators in conducting
and documenting routine monthly inspections of rigging and related structures aboard
their vessels. It also recommends keeping a Rigging Maintenance Logbook to
document deficiencies and corrective actions and to make this logbook available
to attending Coast Guard Marine Inspectors at scheduled inspections. This
protocol should be adapted and modified by the vessel operator into a format most
suitable to the individual vessel. It should be noted that this protocol is not a
substitute for implementing a PMP, as discussed above, and rig inspection checklists
should be incorporated as part of the overall plan.
III. Inspection of Sail Rigging
a. Coast Guard Inspections: If a vessel maintains a PMP, it is an excellent tool that will
help streamline vessel inspections conducted by the Coast Guard. Coast Guard Marine
Inspectors can review a vessel’s PMP, if one is maintained, and evaluate its
implementation against the condition of the rigging. At a minimum, this review should
be conducted at each annual inspection. Further, Marine Inspectors should determine
whether the PMP is being carried out by the vessel crew or by a third party rigging
surveyor or both, and assess the credentials and experience of those conducting rigging
examinations and maintenance aboard. In reviewing the PMP, Marine Inspectors should
determine if any rigging components were replaced in-kind or changed to another type of
component throughout the year, and if the replacement or change was for reasons other
than normal scheduled intervals. For a vessel that does not maintain a PMP, the Officer
in Charge, Marine Inspections (OCMI) and/or Marine Inspector may require a third party
rigging survey in order to verify the condition of the sail rigging and components.
i. Breakdown, disassembly, or removal of standing or running rigging: Before
components are broken down, disassembled, or removed for inspection, it is critical
to know how to safely disassemble components because disassembly can significantly
alter the tune of the rig. Therefore, after components of a sail rigging have been
disassembled and before a vessel goes back into service, a Coast Guard Marine
Inspector should attend for operational tests and sea trials. Special attention must be
given to the “tune” of the rig in its entirety. As an example, the improper tuning of
one component can adversely impact loads elsewhere on the rig.
ii. Marine Inspectors Going Aloft: Coast Guard Marine Inspectors are not expected to go
aloft because the Coast Guard does not provide Personnel Protective Equipment
specific to Marine Inspectors conducting surveys aloft. Attending Marine Inspectors
may use binoculars or other visual aids from the deck level to identify the condition
of the rigging aloft. If an area or item of concern is identified aloft (from the deck
level), it will be incumbent upon the operator by any available means, such as an aloft
survey conducted by a third party rigging surveyor or qualified crewmember, to
provide evidence of the condition of the rigging components in question. When made
available by the owner or operator in a shipyard or other commercial environment,
Coast Guard Marine Inspectors may use man-lift cranes such as “pettibones” or
“cherry pickers” to assist with inspection of a vessel’s rigging.
Enclosure (1) to NVIC 02-16
7
iii. Deficiencies: If deficiencies in the condition of the rigging are found, requirements
for corrective action may be issued. Requirements for corrective action should
normally be made only after a visual inspection of the rigging, dialogue with the
vessel owner or operator, and an assessment of the vessel’s implementation of a PMP
has been made. Based on the variables listed in paragraph I.b., the OCMI will set the
time frame to comply with requirements associated with corrective action, which may
include operational controls. For example, an auxiliary sail vessel with a rigging
deficiency may be restricted from operating under sail, but be allowed to operate
under engine power, until the rigging deficiency is rectified; or, the deficiency may be
confined to a particular section of the rig, such as the head rig, where a restriction
from using the foresail may be imposed until head rig repairs are made, etc.
iv. Coast Guard Documentation Requirements: Upon completion of a vessel’s scheduled
annual Coast Guard inspection, the Marine Inspector will ensure the following items
are documented and retained in the vessel’s permanent file and/or in MISLE:
1. Detailed description of the rig and associated gear;
2. Drawings or pictures of rig and location of key components;
3. Manufacturer, purchase and installation dates of all components;
4. Types of furlers and tensioning systems; and
5. A description of sea trials including tests of all sailing configurations on all
points of sail, condition of cleats and running rigging while operating and any
potential hazard or sail/rigging arrangement that impairs navigation or
passenger safety.
vii. Attending Tall Ships of America (TSA) Vessels: Coast Guard Marine Inspectors
attending TSA vessels should review the TSA protocol aboard member vessels,
ensuring it is appropriately detailed for the complexity of the rig as part of the
comprehensive rigging examination regime envisioned by the above mentioned
checklist: “Recommended Protocol for Rig Inspection and Template for Rig
Inspection Checklist.”
b. Third Party Rigging Surveys: There are two types of third party rigging surveys:
voluntary and Coast Guard-required for cause. In the latter, the owner or operator
furnishes a third party rigging surveyor. A third party rigging surveyor used to conduct,
for example, an annual inspection of the sail rig does not substitute for the vessel
owner/operator from implementing a PMP or conducting and documenting preventative
maintenance inspections.
i. A report from a third party rigging surveyor may be required when a PMP is not in
place and/or not being carried out to help the OCMI and/or Marine Inspector
determine the operating condition of a vessel’s sail rigging and components. When
Enclosure (1) to NVIC 02-16
8
used, the reports of an independent third party rigging surveyor should address the
elements of a PMP. Inspected sailing vessel owners and operators may voluntarily
use the reports of independent third party rigging surveyors on a regular basis to
supplement their own regime.
ii. Within the sail vessel rigging industry, there is no independent certification or
standard qualification criteria for conducting rigging surveys. However, the goal of a
third party rigging survey, in the context of this inspection circular, is to provide a
comprehensive inspection of the entire rigging system – aloft and at and below deck
level (alow), including the integration of the rig system to the hull structure (e.g.,
mast steps, compression posts, beams, chain plates, anchoring points aloft and at deck
level, fastenings, etc).
iii. When the Coast Guard requires a third party rigging survey for cause under the
authority of 46 CFR 176.840, 115.840, or 169.259, it is for the purpose of
determining that the vessel and its equipment are suitable for the service in which it is
employed. The Coast Guard Marine Inspector will be in attendance for the survey
and a copy of the surveyor’s report will become part of the vessel’s inspection record
with the Coast Guard. Furthermore, when the Coast Guard requires a third
party rigging survey, the intent is that the survey include a rigging survey aloft.
Because an examination of the rigging aloft requires sound expertise and judgment, it
is in the interest of both the owner or operator and the Coast Guard to ensure that a
surveyor with demonstrated experience in rigging aloft examinations perform the
required survey. Therefore, prior to contracting for surveyor services, vessel owners
or operators are encouraged to notify the cognizant OCMI, or the OCMI’s
representative, regarding which surveyor will be performing the survey. Doing so
will allow the OCMI, or the OCMI’s representative, the opportunity to communicate
to the vessel’s owner or operator if there are any concerns regarding a surveyor’s
level of expertise.
iv. Third party rigging surveyor qualification screening protocol should include, but not
be limited to, a review of the selected surveyor’s (1) bio or resume, (2) sample work
product to ensure individual has the requisite experience for the rig type being
surveyed and has normal work practice that include comprehensive rigging
inspections and going aloft, and (3) documentation of findings and recommendations
for repair/replacement of rigging components as appropriate. Appendices (3) and (4)
are samples of content to review when evaluating a rigging surveyor.
v. Underway rigging examination/survey: While inspecting the rig in the static mode is
generally adequate to fulfill the intent of the third party survey, the attending Marine
Inspector or the contracted surveyor may require the vessel to get underway in
representative conditions of wind speed, sea state, etc., to effectively inspect the
rigging system under dynamic load, including rig tune, mast column behavior, load-
lead paths, operation of winches, condition of halyards with sails hoisted and working
ends exposed, operational maneuverability, and handling of the vessel. There have
been many instances of small passenger vessel sail rigs passing static rigging
Enclosure (1) to NVIC 02-16
9
inspections dockside, but shortly thereafter, experiencing a critical operational or
mechanical deficiency while underway.
vi. Large, historic, period rigs other than basic fore and aft technology are typically far
more complex and may be beyond the expertise of yacht rigging surveyors or typical
rigging service providers. This may present a resource challenge when a third party
rigging survey for a “tall ship” is deemed necessary pursuant to 46 CFR 176.840,
115.840, or 169.259. Most inspected commercial sail vessels in this category are
members of Tall Ships America (TSA). Because of the strict adherence to the
“Recommended Protocol for Rig Inspection” developed by TSA, there have not been
many instances in which a third party survey for a Tall Ships member vessel was
deemed necessary. However, in those instances when a third party survey is deemed
necessary pursuant to the aforementioned regulation cites, the OCMI may, on a case-
by-case basis and after taking into consideration the relevant third party rigging
screening protocols in paragraph III.b.iv above, accept a survey that has been
performed by part of that membership group who possesses the rigging expertise
specific to historic tall ships.
vii. Owners may enroll in certain rig certification programs and be considered equivalent
to meeting the inspection regime recommended by this guidance document. Those
owners should enroll and be able to show current completion of a Coast Guard
reviewed rig certification program. Currently, the Coast Guard is aware of and has
reviewed only one outside rig certification program provided by Germanischer Lloyd
(GL) Group. In 2013, GL published “Guidelines for Inspection and Maintenance of
Tall Ships.” Now merged with Det Norse Veritas (DNV), DNV GL offers a
condition survey service for tall ships that are associated with the above mentioned
guidelines. See details at http://www.gl-group.com/infoServices/rules/pdfs/gl_i-4-
4_e.pdf. Vessels enrolled in this program, essentially a rig certification program
available to all vessels (including those not classed
2
by DNV GL) and based on
mandated regular third-party inspection conducted by DNV GL designated rig
inspectors, will be considered as meeting an equivalent standard to the inspection
regime recommended in this document. Rig certification programs are not
necessarily limited to DNV GL. Any company that wishes to have their rig
certification program reviewed by the Coast Guard, for equivalence to this inspection
regime, should contact the Office of Commercial Vessel Compliance (CG-CVC) at
CG-CVC-1@uscg.mil. Likewise, owners may inquiry about the list of reviewed rig
certification programs by also contacting CG-CVC at the aforementioned e-mail
address.
viii. When making his or her assessment, the attending Coast Guard Marine Inspector
shall review the findings of the rigging surveyor (overall assessment of the rigging
system, recommendations made, conclusions reached, etc.) and indicate agreement
2
Classed means that a vessel meets the classification society requirements that embody the technical rules, regulations,
standards, guidelines and associated surveys and inspections covering the design, construction and through-life compliance of a
ship's structure and essential engineering and electrical systems.
Enclosure (1) to NVIC 02-16
10
with results or express reason for disagreement, to include addressing additional
concerns.
ix. If deemed necessary by the Coast Guard Marine Inspector, disassembly or “backing
down” rig tension may be required pursuant to 46 CFR 176.840, 115.840, or 169.259.
The degree of disassembly, untensioning, etc., will be based on the third party rigging
surveyor’s findings and recommendations. While the third party rigging surveyor’s
findings and recommendations offer the OCMI valuable insight and information
about the condition of the rigging components and associated equipment, he or she is
not strictly bound by it and, when exercising discretion, may allow continued
operations contingent on increased monitoring and inspection if the risks can be
effectively managed. Deficiencies should be documented into actionable written
requirements that include a specific timeframe to comply, which, depending on the
circumstances, could be long-term, short-term, or “no sail.”
x. A Coast Guard Marine Inspector is not required to attend third party surveys used by
the vessel owner/operator for normal maintenance or as part of an already approved
rigging maintenance program.
c. Supplementary Inspection Techniques Beyond Visual Examinations: Regular rigging
inspection in the context of this guidance document is intended as preventative
maintenance and shall be primarily based on a detailed visual examination of the rig and
associated components, supplemented by the use of visual magnification (e.g., pocket
microscope) and non-destructive testing (NDT), as necessary.
i. NDT is appropriate when questions of materiel integrity exist after close visual
examination. The use of NDT may be required by the attending Marine Inspector or
recommended by the third party rigging surveyor. Hull integrity and strength in way
of chain plates, masts, mast steps, and other critical attachment points shall be
carefully evaluated. If a rigging component and/or structures are found with evidence
of significant deterioration such as fractures, excessive pitting or corrosion, the
particular component shall be renewed or replaced in-kind. Repairs or alterations to
equipment that affect the safety of the vessel shall be done in accordance with 46
CFR 176.700, 115.700 or 169.235. The OCMI has the discretion and authority to
request review by the Marine Safety Center (MSC). See section IV below.
d. Guidance for Inspection and Replacement of Standing Rigging and Components: The
replacement cycles outlined in this section are recommendations based on industry
published guidelines. Replacement cycles are vessel specific and based on the variables
discussed in Section I.b. above, manufacturer’s specifications and recommendations,
prior rigging inspections, as well as inspection observations by the attending Coast Guard
Marine Inspector. Owners should use empirical data from rig design parameters (safety
factors), manufacturer’s recommendations, vessel use, environmental conditions and the
condition of the rigging at the time of evaluation to establish their replacement intervals.
Special attention should be given to components and equipment used in a high ambient
heat and water salinity environment. Components and/or rigs with minimal to no local
service history should start with conservative inspection cycles and be examined very
Enclosure (1) to NVIC 02-16
11
closely until operating history and subsequent inspection provides the confidence that a
reliable life cycle trend is emerging.
Recommended references on rigging and sail vessel inspection are provided in Appendix
(5) and preventative cleaning maintenance for stainless steel rigging components are
provided in Appendix (6).
i. Stainless Steel Wire Rigging: The following guidelines apply to bare 316 grade
stainless steel wire cable that is not “served,” coated or otherwise covered. The
intervals are not absolute but considered good marine practice. Industry published
guidelines for the replacement or renewal of stainless steel wire cable are based on
many variables, including heat, geographic location and salinity of the water.
NAVTEC “Rigging Service Guidelines” notes the following life expectancy based on
those variables:
1. Heat & water salinity maximum (FL, HI, Caribbean) – 5 to 10 yrs.
2. Heat & water salinity medium (East/West Coast of U.S.) – 10 to 15 yrs.
3. Fresh water climate – 15 to 20 yrs.
Replacement intervals outside these guidelines may be considered on a case-by-case
basis with the approval of the local OCMI where an individual norm can be justified
due to design, condition and service exposure. Establishing individual norms may
also result in shorter intervals under certain circumstances. In the absence of
maintenance history, OCMIs are encouraged to start the replacement interval
discussion based on the above and then tailor it to local conditions while ascertaining
the condition of fleets within their area of responsibility.
ii. Stainless Steel Wire and Terminals: Rigging wire cycles include not only the service
life of the wire cable itself, but the end fittings used to make standing rigging
attachments and associated anchoring points. The two most common methods of
cable attachment are swage (factory compression end fittings) or swageless
(mechanical field or shop installed end fittings). See additional guidance and
examples in Appendix (7).
iii. Stainless Steel “Swageless” Mechanical Compression, Terminals: Mechanical rigging
terminals are designed to create various types of wire rope or rod terminations
depending on the required application at the anchoring point. These fittings are
known to be very reliable with excellent longevity when properly sized and
assembled for the application. The mechanism operates by creating an aggressive
clamping action on the wire rope using an internal, conical and collapsible
wedge/cone, which separates the wire-core wire strands from the cover strands.
When assembled, the mechanical clamping action on the wire end resembles the
“Chinese finger-lock” principle. See the following link for an example:
http://hayn.com/marine/tech/himod/install.html.
Enclosure (1) to NVIC 02-16
12
Common trade names for wire compression fittings include: Norseman, Sta-Lok and
Hayn (Hi-Mod). All three manufacturers claim to exclusively use 316 series grade
stainless steel in their production, which provides a reasonable degree of corrosion
resistance and high level of service reliability in the marine environment. Mechanical
terminals are also known to be reusable in subsequent rigging wire replacement
cycles, generally recommended not to exceed 2 to 3 wire replacements. If rigging
terminal reuse is intended when recycling the rigging wire, these fittings should be
closely examined for indications of cyclic fatigue or excessive elongation of clevis
pin holes. As with all stainless steel rigging components, the service life of these
fittings can also vary and so should be given close scrutiny whenever wire cables are
inspected. As with all other stainless steel marine hardware, fittings subject to
increased salinity, temperature and load cycles will require more frequent component
replacement.
All three manufacturers indicate that their wire terminals are capable of being
disassembled for inspection, and then reassembled for continued use. While this is
true to some degree, only the Hi-Mod terminals are fully capable of disassembly
inspection as the rigging wire is not permanently deformed over the internal
compression cone or encapsulated in the recommended water sealant used to fill the
air space inside the terminal body with Norseman and Sta-Lok fittings.
Disassembly of mechanical rigging terminals for inspection should only be required
when there is visible evidence of corrosion. When required, the disassembly process
should be done with care and awareness in an effort to avoid galling or stripping the
female-threaded terminal body or the male-treaded end fitting. If this occurs, it
renders the entire rigging component non-repairable, requiring replacement.
Disassembly of mechanical compression terminals should not be considered a
routine inspection procedure.
iv. Galvanized Steel Wire Rigging: Galvanized steel wire is in common use aboard
vessels with historic period or simple working rigs. In addition to the galvanized
coating, wire rope on traditional or period rigs is normally “wormed, parceled, and
served” a three-step process to seal and cover the wire rope protecting it from the
elements and corrosion. Worming involves using tarred marline to follow the lay of
the wire rope and fill it out to a smoother surface for serving. If the lay is shallow,
the wire may only be tarred. Parceling is the winding of tarred pieces of canvas
around a wire rope that has been wormed. Serving completes the operation by
binding small cord, spun yarn or marline around an already wormed and parceled
wire rope.
When properly applied and maintained, standing wire rigging protected in this
manner can last indefinitely. The most common reason for early replacement is
chafing, broken strands or something other than just simple corrosion. Wire rope
with this type of treatment should only be uncovered for further examination when
inspection indicates the covering has been penetrated as evidenced by visible
corrosion (rust).
Enclosure (1) to NVIC 02-16
13
v. Galvanized Steel Wire Fittings: Stainless steel swages or swageless fittings are not
normally used on galvanized wire rope. Galvanized steel wire, especially when used
on historical or period rigs may be spliced and fitted with a thimble, for use with a
shackle when attaching directly to strap chain plates or chain plates composed of
individual links that incorporate dead eyes and lanyards. Similar to the inspection of
the wire itself, splices or turnbacks with wire seizing as terminal fittings should be
visually inspected to determine their condition. Evidence of rust, broken wires,
excessive racking (in the case of seized turnbacks), or displaced/sunken strands (in
the case of splices) would be cause for closer inspection and/or judicious spot
removal of the protective service. When not spliced, galvanized wire rope eyes may
be made and secured mechanically with wire clamps. The clamp consists of a saddle
and a u-bolt with nuts. The saddle should be installed over the standing part of the
wire and the u-bolt over the bitter end section. There are usually a minimum of two
clamps and preferably three, evenly spaced and wrenched down tight. Smaller rigs
may use Nicopress fittings to secure wire eyes. Nicopress is a trade name for oval
shaped compression sleeves designed to be slipped over the standing and bitter ends,
then mechanically pressed on to both wires simultaneously with a special tool. Wire
pendants are commonly attached to centerboards using these fittings.
vi. Poured, Socketed Wire Terminals: More often utilized in classic/period rigging
applications with galvanized steel wire, these fittings are also used to terminate
stainless steel wire in a number of contemporary rigging systems. The sockets are
typically cast from steel or bronze with significant cross sections and scantlings that
generally exceed the breaking strength of the wire or cable by a very large factor.
These terminals are routinely used and regulated in the lifting appliance industry
(elevators), where the working load limit (WLL) is generally 20% of the wire/cable
breaking strength, but there are no similar regulations or standards in the sail vessel
rigging industry. Sail rigging safety factors are considered in the design phase but are
not specified by regulation and vary depending on a sail vessel’s origin or intended
purpose. While proof load testing (such as “pull testing”) provides a level of
confidence in the completed assembly, this testing method could be excessive,
damaging to the fitting, or prove inconclusive if conducted without parameters.
Historic and/or more-recently-built classically-rigged-vessels are more likely to have
designs empirically developed over time with substantial scantlings and redundant
standing rigging components, typical of the world before precise computer modeling
and calculation. Marine Inspectors should use caution when considering “proof load
testing,” as it may not accurately assess the assembly’s function within the rigging
system if individual components are of varying ultimate breaking strengths.
vii. Fiber Rigging: These systems, particularly those using the latest synthetics, are
specialized installations that come in a variety of materials and associated end
fittings. They are being increasingly used to replace natural fiber rope rigging on
period traditional rigs of all sizes. The manufacturer should be consulted for details
on inspection and longevity.
Enclosure (1) to NVIC 02-16
14
viii. Rod Rigging: Rod rigging is a specialized application usually seen on purpose-built
racing rigs, such as retired America’s Cup boats. The end fitting is a cold formed rod
head and unique to this style of rigging. Rod rigging terminals must be disassembled
for inspection and/or subject toNDT at regular intervals as recommended by the
product manufacturer or as necessary based on service records. While rod and rod-
heads generally last longer than wire rigging, re-heading will eventually be necessary
as specified by the manufacturer.
ix. Chain Plates: Strap-type chain plates and attachment bolts may be removed and made
available for inspection at the discretion of the attending Marine Inspector. Vessels
with embedded chain plates and attachments, especially if stainless steel, may require
further inspection/removal based on age, material and operating conditions. These
potentially destructive inspections may be minimized by removing a representative
sample and closely evaluating its condition prior to making the determination to
remove more chain plates for inspection.
Similarly, chain plates made up of chain assemblies or links on historic or period
traditional rigs may be visually inspected and disassembled or removed for close-up
inspection and/or subject to NDT for evaluation at the discretion of the attending
Marine Inspector.
x. Mast tangs, Toggles and Anchoring Points Aloft: Similar to chain plates as discussed
above, mast tangs, toggles, fasteners and anchoring points aloft shall also be made
available for inspection by disassembly as necessary to determine fastener condition
and replacement cycles.
e. Sail Furling Systems:
Sail Furling Systems, also referred to as “roller-furling” systems, are very common on
modern-day/contemporarily rigged vessels and becoming more common on new-built,
period/classically rigged vessels. Since appearing on the market in the 1970s, these
systems have proven quite reliable. While furling systems are more frequently used with
headsails, jibs, and staysails, they are becoming more commonly used for mainsail
furling with in-mast and on-boom furling systems as well.
When a sail furling system fails to operate, and, if for any reason, the sail cannot be
removed, this can put the safety of the vessel and passengers at risk. For this reason, sail
furling system and equipment inspections should be conducted on an annual basis to
confirm proper functioning of the system including the ability to remove the sail.
Testing sail furling systems and equipment is most effectively conducted while
underway with the sails powered up.
During annual inspections, Coast Guard Marine Inspectors should examine the operation
of the roller furling systems by asking to have the sail opened and closed to confirm
proper operation and lower the halyard to demonstrate the sail moves freely in the furling
extrusion. The head of the sail should be lowered enough so it passes freely past the
uppermost foil section connector (about 10 ft).
Enclosure (1) to NVIC 02-16
15
Furling drum and torque tube assemblies that conceal essential standing rigging,
headstay, terminals and turnbuckle should be disassembled for inspections on an annual
basis in the presence of a Coast Guard Marine Inspector or qualified third party surveyor.
Caution should be used and manufacturer’s instructions followed when conducting roller
furling system disassemblies. If unfamiliar with this procedure, the vessel owner or
operator should consult with a professional rigger for assistance until proficient with the
process.
f. Running Rigging: While the primary focus of this guidance document is to ensure an
appropriate examination of the condition of the standing rigging and the associated
components that contain the stationary rig, it is equally important to inspect the condition
of the running rigging and associated equipment. Inspections should be conducted with
due consideration for system complexity including components in high load bearing
service with high consequence should failure occur. Relevant components include
running back and check stays employed in dynamic mast standing rigging systems,
highly loaded halyards and sheeting systems of both period and contemporary rigs.
Boom topping lifts, quarter lifts, multi-purchase tackle systems, belaying points, as well
as the condition and fastening of running blocks adjacent to passenger passageways on
deck and in all applications aloft should also be given careful scrutiny. Equipment issues
include the following:
i. Condition of cordage or wire rope: Many factors influence service life, such as age;
designed load rating and use application; ultraviolet light deterioration; point loading;
designed radius and effective operation of turning blocks and sheaves; rope
deformation; chafe; parted yarns on wire rope; and condition of splices, thimbles and
shackles, including shackle seizing where applicable.
ii. Winches – manual, hydraulic or electric: They are used on nearly all contemporary
and many traditionally rigged vessels. Typical manual winches can easily multiply
force on the order of 40 to 1. Hydraulic/electric winches are capable of even higher
ratios. Winch failure of any kind can lead to catastrophic results. Disassembly for
inspection and servicing should occur on a regular and scheduled basis.
Documentation of winch service cycles should be included in the records of the
vessel’s rig inspection log. Coast Guard Marine Inspectors may require winch
disassembly if acoustic or visual observations indicate corrosion or disrepair or if
there is no record of servicing. Winch mounting fasteners to mast or deck surfaces
should also be pulled for inspection every few years to ascertain condition. Special
consideration should be made for the condition of winches used to haul crew
members aloft to conduct maintenance and required inspection. Fastener inspection
should include drum pawls when winches are disassembled.
iii. Boom Vangs and Hydraulic Tensioners: Generally, these are used on contemporary
rigs, performance sail craft, retired race boats and large cruising boats to shape and
bend the mast/boom to achieve desired sail trim in changing conditions. Local
loading of components and their attachment points can be high, especially at
anchoring points on booms and mast bases. Fastenings and welds on extruded
Enclosure (1) to NVIC 02-16
16
aluminum spars need to be inspected closely for fractures due to normal service stress
on these components.
iv. Lifts and Lazy Jacks: Topping lifts need to be rigged correctly to keep booms in place
when sails are lowered or doused to prevent passenger or crew injury. When lazy
jacks are relied upon in lieu of topping lifts, they should be capable of suspending
booms in all operational circumstances (i.e., max loading). Topping lifts should be
inspected closely in rigs where the sail does not carry the weight of the spar or where
the rig is otherwise “topping lift dependent.” Boom goosenecks or other pivot points
must also be inspected for continued serviceability, with attention to welds, fasteners,
axis pins, axis bores, etc. Excessive wear on axis points should be addressed in a
timely fashion.
g. Unstepping the Rig: The purpose of unstepping the rig is to provide a close-up visual
inspection of the entire rig including the mast and mast step as well as critical
attachments of shrouds and stays at both the mast and hull (chain plates). See Appendix
(7) for typical stainless steel end fitting details. Clevis and cotter pins, toggles, as well as
cable or rod end fittings can be inspected more thoroughly when the rig is un-stepped.
Disassembly should be to the extent necessary to properly examine all connections, cable
terminations and anchoring points. Owners/operators, surveyors and Marine Inspectors
shall pay close attention to corrosion, lead-to-load alignment, any modifications, and the
addition of equipment mounted directly to mast structures. See Appendix (8) for
corrosion inspection points and Appendix (9) for paths to spar and rigging failure.
Inspection intervals specific to sail vessel rigs: Pursuant to 46 CFR 176.840, 115.840 and
169.259, the OCMI has broad authority to require “any additional test or inspection
deemed necessary to determine suitability for the service in which the vessel is
employed.” The guidance in this document is to facilitate the inspection process with
respect to sail vessel rig inspection, including unstepping masts at intervals acceptable to
the OCMI and is designed in support of the Coast Guard’s statutory and regulatory
missions to safeguard lives, protect property and preserve the marine environment.
i. Multi-hulls: Multi hulled vessels with typical extruded aluminum or composite masts
with inaccessible steps should have their masts removed to the ground for inspection
at a minimum interval of six (6) years.
ii. Monohulls: Mono-hulled vessels with deck stepped configurations, determined to be
inaccessible by the OCMI, should be unstepped at 6 year intervals.
iii. Vessels with wood masts, spars and appendages: Wood masts (timber or made)
should be unstepped once every 10 years for a comprehensive inspection of spar
condition as well as attachment hardware on the ground. “Made” spars include but
are not limited to box chamber, strip planked, faceted or solid laminated.
iv. Alternative rig inspection timeframes: Other intervals, whether shorter or longer, for
unstepping the rig may be considered on a case-by-case basis, where an individual
vessel’s norm may justify an alternative interval due to design, condition and service
Enclosure (1) to NVIC 02-16
17
exposure. Large, Period, Traditional rigs or other specialized rigs may be considered
for alternative unstepping timeframes. Other justification might be made for vessels
that are routinely and seasonally down rigged sufficiently to allow an alternate
method of evaluation. All justification to implement an alternative timeframe should
be approved by the cognizant OCMI as part of a comprehensive rig maintenance
program. Known examples are local fleets that do not leave an OCMI zone such as
the Windjammer Fleet in Maine or the 12 Meter Racing Fleet in Rhode Island, whose
practices are fully documented with the cognizant OCMI. Establishing individual
norms may also result in shorter intervals under certain circumstances. In the absence
of maintenance history, OCMIs should determine, based on the myriad factors
identified in I.b. above, the time frame that a vessel’s mast should be unstepped for
appropriate examination. Without compelling justification, that time frame should
not exceed 10 years. Consideration should also be given to staggering the schedule
of mast unstepping and disassembly for inspection of vessels with multiple masts.
Similar alternate proposals, including but not limited to the use of NDT techniques,
may be considered for steel vessels with steel spars that are integral with the hull if
deemed reasonable and acceptable to the cognizant OCMI.
For the purpose of repair and/or replacement, information on acceptable parameters
for spar grade wood is included in Appendix (10).
v. All other non-wood keel stepped rigs
: They shall be evaluated on a case-by-case
basis. Industry literature should be consulted for recommended maintenance
inspection intervals. For more information, please refer to the Navtec Rigging
Service Guidelines which can be downloaded at:
www.navtecriggingsolutions.com.
OCMIs should pay special attention when dealing with former purpose built racing
rigs to determine an appropriate interval, especially if the design safety factor of the
rig is unknown or has not been reduced in the sail plan for its new career as a
passenger vessel. In addition to establishing and maintaining a routine maintenance
program (such as wire renewal/replacement), all sailing vessel operators are
encouraged to propose a suitable mast unstepping schedule for consideration by the
local OCMI. In all cases, masts of any material can be ordered unstepped on any rig
type if, at the discretion of the attending Marine Inspector, closer examination is
needed based on the visible condition of the mast and/or components.
vi. For vessels operating in saltwater that fall under a regulatory two-year haul-out cycle,
it is anticipated that unstepping the rig will be concurrent with scheduled drydock
exams. It is recognized that unstepping is not necessarily limited to when a vessel is
in drydock. For larger traditional or period rigs, unstepping may, in fact be more
easily done afloat. After the rig is re-installed and statically tuned, a Coast Guard
Marine Inspector shall attend for operational tests and sea trials as appropriate prior
to permitting the vessel to go back into service.
h. Sail Condition: Close scrutiny should be given to vessels whose propulsion is listed on
the Certificate of Inspection as “sail” vs. “auxiliary sail.” On sail-only vessels, sail is the
primary propulsion, so condition obviously matters moreso. Factors to consider include
Enclosure (1) to NVIC 02-16
18
age, covered stowage to protect against U.V. deterioration, frequency of operation with
sails set, and normal sailing conditions with passengers embarked such as prevailing
wind speeds. Sails on sail-only propulsion vessels should be visually examined for rips,
patches, abrasions, excessive sail tape repairs, pin holes in panels, torn cringles or
evidence of broken stitching, particularly in way of intended reinforcements at the head,
clew and tack as well as at reef points if installed and used. Requirements for repair or
replacement should be carefully considered and take into account the whole sail plan.
Factors to consider would include the normal number of sails set, the sail configurations
approved by the Coast Guard to determine redundancy, spares aboard, and the ability to
make sail if any sails blow out in service. Attending Marine Inspectors may consider the
opinion of a sail maker in determining the remaining service life of sails.
i. Recommended Emergency Safety Equipment: Based on lessons learned from marine
casualty events involving dismastings, a cutting tool of a sufficient size and strength to
cut through vessel rigging is highly recommended on board inspected sailing vessels.
Having a cutting tool to free the rig from the vessel in the event of dismasting will help
prevent further damage to the hull and any crew/passengers from being entrapped by the
rig on deck.
IV. Sailing Vessel Design and Plan Review
a. Marine Safety Center (MSC) - Plan Review: OCMIs should require that all rigging
systems be reviewed by the Coast Guard Marine Safety Center (MSC) during initial
certification or following modifications to the rigging system. In an effort to standardize
and improve the plan review process, the MSC has issued Plan Review Guideline (PRG)
H1-15, MSC Guidelines for Review of Rigging Systems for Sail Vessels, which outlines
procedures for submitting plans and calculations to the MSC. There are no prescriptive
requirements for review of rigging systems; therefore, the MSC’s review is focused on
the suitability of the submitter’s methodology and validity of the assumptions made in the
design process. It is the responsibility of the submitter to demonstrate that all mast and
rigging components are adequately sized for the intended route and service.
Plan review cannot effectively evaluate every potential condition a vessel may experience
during operation. In addition, the effects of fatigue and tuning may not be considered
during plan review. Therefore, a holistic approach to evaluating a particular rigging
system's adequacy must be taken. Coast Guard Marine Inspectors may consult at any
time the Traveling Inspection Staff (CG-5P- TI) or the MSC for assistance.
When evaluating historic or period rigging systems, Coast Guard Marine Inspectors
should keep in mind that these types of rigs have to a great extent a robust level of
redundancy in structure and load paths.
b. Sail Vessel Plan Review - New Construction or Initial Certification: OCMIs should
require that all rigs be reviewed by the MSC during initial certification. The following
regulations apply under “Plans and information required:”
Enclosure (1) to NVIC 02-16
19
i. 46 CFR 177.202(b)(12) and 116.202(b)(14): “On sail vessels: Masts, including
integration into the ship’s structure; and rigging plans showing sail areas and
centers of effort as well as arrangements, dimensions, and connections of the
standing rigging.”
ii. 46 CFR 177.330 and 116.330:“The design, materials, and construction of masts,
posts, yards, booms, bowsprits, and standing rigging on a sailing vessel must be
suitable for the intended service. The hull structure must be adequately reinforced to
ensure sufficient strength and resistance to plate buckling. The cognizant OCMI may
require the owner to submit detailed calculations on the strength of the mast, post,
yards, booms, bowsprits, and standing rigging [to the MSC] for evaluation.”
iii. 46 CFR 169.309(b), (c) and (e): “Masts, posts and other supporting structures are to
have adequate strength to withstand the highest loading imposed by the sail systems
during all normal and emergency conditions. Particular attention must be given to
the integration of the masts and rigging into the hull structure. The hull structure
must be adequately reinforced and stiffened locally to ensure sufficient strength and
resistance to plate buckling. The design, materials, and construction of masts, yards,
booms, bowsprits, and standing rigging must be suitable for intended service.
Detailed calculations with respect to the strength of the sail system may be required.
Approval by a recognized classification society may be considered satisfactory
evidence of the adequacy of the sail system. Special consideration will be given to
the structural requirements of vessels not contemplated by the standards of a
recognized classification society and to the use of materials not specifically included
in these standards.”
Note: These three regulations are specific to sail vessel requirements and are similar in
scope and intent, with added flexibility for sailing school vessels as many were existing
prior to the those regulations went into effect. Vessels certificated under 46 CFR
Subchapter I, with primary propulsion as sail and permitted to carry volunteers and/or
passengers for hire, will be guided by the same inspection principles specific to sails and
associated components as prescribed in the above regulations, and the guidance found in
this document.
c. Sail Vessel Plan Review – Rigging Repair or Modification: The following regulations
apply under “Repairs and alterations:”
i. 46 CFR 176.700, 115.700 and 169.235: “Repairs or alterations to the hull,
machinery, or equipment that effect the safety of the vessel must not be made without
the approval of the cognizant OCMI, except during an emergency… The owner,
operator or managing agent shall submit… details of any proposed alterations to the
cognizant OCMI [for approval]… Drawings are not required…for repairs or
replacements in kind… The OCMI may require an inspection and testing whenever a
repair or alteration is undertaken.”
The Coast Guard considers repairs or alterations to the rigging system of an inspected
Enclosure (1) to NVIC 02-16
20
sail vessel to fall within this criterion. Also within the scope of alterations that must
be reported to the OCMI before being undertaken are upgrades that incorporate new
technology, that are not replacement-in-kind, or that may impose new or different hull
loading than originally designed/envisioned. Examples include changing
components, systems, or configurations (angles) that have no operating history on the
vessel, such as spar or rigging material (e.g., wood or aluminum to carbon fiber or
steel cable standing rigging to synthetic fiber, etc.).
ii. OCMIs shall require submission to the MSC all plans and other specified material of
sailing vessel rigs that have experienced failure of the rig while under sail, whether or
not the rig was reviewed by the MSC during initial certification. Vessels certificated
under Subchapter I as cargo and miscellaneous vessels have similar notification
requirements under 46 CFR 91.45. Accordingly, rig failure aboard a vessel
certificated under Subchapter I will fall under the same notification protocol.
d. Modification or Changes to Rigging or Sail Plan: The OCMI shall be notified prior to
any changes or modifications to the rig and sail plan of record. The level of plan review
will depend on the degree of modification and be determined by the OCMI prior to
carrying passengers for hire. OCMIs should consider requiring MSC review of rigging or
sail plans that alter the rigging systems structural arrangements, loads, or connections,
and when vessel stability is impacted.
Part of the annual rigging inspection will include a discussion with the Coast Guard
Marine Inspector of any changes to the rig and associated hardware as well as verifying
the approved sail plan as necessary. Modifications or repairs that may affect the safety of
the vessel include but are not limited to:
i. Changes that are not replacement in kind;
ii. Changes to sail plan and/or sail material (hi-tech fabrics harness more energy for the
existing rig to absorb);
iii. Changes in weight aloft;
iv. Significant changes in leads of running or standing rigging;
v. Complete rig change-out or renewal;
vi. Structural repairs in way of standing or running rigging attachments;
vii. Any repairs to masts and spars (woodwork, welding or composite lay-up);
viii. Addition or subtraction of standing or running rigging;
ix. Addition or removal of roller furling systems;
x. Addition of hardware that due to installation details will lead to increased corrosion;
and
Enclosure (1) to NVIC 02-16
21
xi. Any hull modifications that would increase stability (reduction of vertical center of
gravity, increases and decreases in displacement) and therefore increase the loading
on the rigging system.
Appendix (1) to Enclosure (1) of NVIC 02-16
RIGGING KEY COMPONENTS LIST
1
Rigging Survey:
1. General Rig Description
2. Mast Step
- Compression Post; Base condition (drainage); Mast Partners
3. Chainplates
- Materials & condition; Fasteners
4. Deck Hardware
- Travellers and blocks; Tracks for sheets & blocks; Shackles; Boom vang; Furling gear
5. Winches
- Mast mounted; Deck/cabin top mounted; Line stoppers
6. Spars
- Penetrations; Tangs; Spreaders & bases; Boom and gooseneck fitting;
- Spinnaker/Whisker poles; Masthead hardware & sheaves; Antennas, light, wind indicators
7. Stays/Shrouds
- Wires; Terminals Ends/Swage & Swageless Fittings; Turnbuckles & toggles
- Chain Shrouds/Links/Deadeyes & Lanyards; Running backstays; Clevis pins & cotter pins
8. Running Rigging
- Halyards; Splices; Shackles; Sheets; Blocks
9. Sails
- Correct sail area; Battens; Reinforcements & chafe patches; Reefing points; Stitching
10. Catamarans
- Crossbeam; Ladder & attachments; Dolphin/Pelican striker & bridle arrangement
Appendix (2) to Enclosure (1) of NVIC 02-16
1
RIGGING INVENTORY/PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE INSPECTION TEMPLATE (SAMPLE)
Inspected Passenger Vessel ( ) Official #( )
SCOPE OF INSPECTIONS:
Purpose for survey: USCG required inspections with report
including rig inventory / index of components
Comprehensive spar, standing and running rigging systems
inspections with mast out
Mast column, spar attachments, rigging terminals, toggles, securing
pins, mast welds and halyard sheaves were closely examined for
anomalies, corrosion, fastening deformation or elongation of
attachments. Fair-leading evaluation of standing and running
systems
(On deck) Similar to the above inspection of wires, terminals
toggles, etc. Also to include turnbuckle hardware, terminals, toggles
connections to chain plate heads and fair-leading of all equipment.
Below decks; the chain-plate hardware fastenings and foundations
were inspected, fasteners replaced
The mast compression load path (deck, main beam, bulkhead)
were examined for indications of fatigue, material or structural
failure
FILE NUMBER
SURVEY PREPARED FOR
WHERE INSPECTED
ATTENDANT DURING
INSPECTION
LENGTH – BEAM - DEPTH
GROSS – NET TONNAGE
HULL MATERIAL
USCG CERTIFIED FOR
STABILITY LETTER
VESSEL BUILDER
HOME PORT
OFFICIAL # REGISTRATION
OWNER’S ADDRESS
SAIL AREA
SPAR/RIG DESIGNER
MANUFACTURER
INSTALLER
Rigging Configuration: (Narrative description)
Appendix (2) to the Enclosure of NVIC 02-16
2
VESSEL
NAME
TYPE
OFFICIAL #
REGISTRATION
LOA
BEAM
DEPTH
TONNAGE
NET/GROSS
STABILITY
LETTER
SAIL
AREA
DATE INSPECTED/
PURPOSE OF SURVEY
Inspected passenger
vessel.
MAST/S TYPE
BUILDER
SECTION / SEAMS / TAPER
STEP/PARTNERS
AGE
TUNING
COLUMN
PULLED FOR INSPECTION?
INSPECTED ALOFT?
No
Deficiencies
Mast installed new in 2003
Inspected standing and
removed Aug - Oct 2013 for
mast-out credit for COI
Replaced in 2011
SHROUD/STAY
WIRE TYPE/
DIAMETER
TERMINALS ALOFT/
TERMINALS A-LOW
CLEVIS
PIN
MAST CONNECTIONS ALOFT
DECK CONNECTIONS
AGE
COMMENTS
Upper/cap shrouds
1/2" 1X19 SS
Swage stud into
articulating socket aloft
Swage stud to
turnbuckles a-low.
7/8" on
deck
3/4"
aloft,
Carbon "clam shells" fastened and
bonded to mast aloft
2011
All fittings removed for inspection 10/13
during mast-out inspection
Head-stay
Same above
Same
Same
Same
2011
Connections inside furling unit inspected
as part of annual service program
Head-stay bridles
5/8" 1X19SS
Hi-Mod mechanical
terminals with
turnbuckles
1" each
end
Integral aluminum lug on bow-
beam ends, Three-Point link plate
at center
2012
No deficiencies noted with bridles or link
plate. Link plate replaced in 2010
Superior diamonds
-15 (7.52mm)
Nitronic 50
rod
Mechanical cold formed
rod-head terminals
5/8"
each end
Through mast link plates aloft and
alow
2003
Upper diamond plate original, aluminum.
Lower link plate replaced with same
gauge stainless steel plate
Inferior diamonds
-4 (4.37mm)
Same above
3/8"
Same above
2003
Original link plates noted in good
condition
I I I I
Appendix (2) to Enclosure (1) of NVIC 02-16
3
Surveyor’s comments - spars & standing rigging system:
Standing rigging and anchoring points noted in excellent condition during survey. Shroud and bridle wires recently replaced. Chainplate
fasteners replaced during 2013 dry dock. Spars, boom and bow beam noted in good condition. Some corrosion affecting paint on bow beam
should be treated in short order.
Diamond rods are original equipment (2003) are approaching the end of their (Navtec recommended) service life. Rod assembly was
disassembled for comprehensive inspection in 2011 in the presence of USCG inspectors. No deficiencies were noted, all rod heads were found in
excellent condition at the time. Replacement of rods was proposed for this (2013) dry-dock cycle even though no deficiencies existed which
would dictate such replacement. The operator has requested that the system is modified to (more conventional) 1 X 19 SS wire & fittings.
Diamond-rods are scheduled to be replaced during next annual inspection in October, 2014 with modifications as stated. Plan of proposed
changes will be submitted to USCG OCMI for approval prior to changes made
Running Rigging
SHEET/HALYARD
MATERIAL TYPE/SIZE
FAIR LEADS
BLOCKS
CONDITION/COMMENTS
Mainsheet
Dacron Sta-set X 7/16"
Adequate
Adequate to anticipated loads
All running rigging noted in good condition
Jibsheet
Same
Same
Same
Main halyard
Class II rope
Same
Same
Jib halyard
Same
Same
Same
WINCH - LOCATION
MANUFACTURER/SIZE/TYPE
SPEEDS
MOUNTING
UNIT CONDITION/COMMENTS
Main halyard
At base mast
Harken 16
1
Secure
Running rigging equipment noted in good condition
Jib halyard
At base of mast
Same
Same
Same
Same
Headsail Furling
Harken MK 4
1
Same
Same
4
Standing and running rigging inspection and preventative maintenance schedule
Daily: Visual (walk-through) inspection of all deck and eye level standing and running rigging fittings.
Visual inspection, from deck level, of mast and fittings aloft. Inspections to be conducted by the Captain and or experienced Crew members.
Weekly: Cleaning of all deck level toggles and swages with light abrasive pads followed by a close visual inspection of all deck level fittings. Check for wear on
all running rigging lines. Thorough cleaning and anti-corrosion lubrication of both backstay toggles, turnbuckles and swages.
Monthly: Close inspections aloft conducted by Captain or experienced Crew Member. Checking for missing cotter pins, parted strands on shrouds or stays,
splits in swage tails and furling system and halyard attachments.
Semi-annual (every 6 months): Comprehensive rigging inspection of entire system by qualified party to include tuning if required.
Six year cycles (minimum): Mast removal for full inspection including disassemblies of fittings, wear measurements taken, dye testing if applicable on any
fittings in question, cleaning and lubricating of all turning blocks, testing and random sampling of chain plate fastenings, replacement of parts as necessary.
This inspection shall be conducted in the presence of the designated USCG Marine Inspector to log credit for mast-out inspection cycles.
A log of the inspections and maintenance described in this schedule shall be maintained by the Captains and Crew of the vessel and shall be
kept on board for review as requested by USCG Marine Safety Inspectors.
Appendix (3) to Enclosure (1) of NVIC 02-16
THIRD PARTY RIGGING SURVEY (SAMPLE A)
1
FILE # _____________________
The following is a report of mast and rigging condition for the commercial passenger vessel_______, Official #_________,
inspected by the undersigned beginning ________________ and completed on ____________________. The inspections were
conducted at ________________________________ at the request of ___________________, master of vessel. _____________
was also inspected under full sail during sea trials on _____________ in brisk, ____knot winds off __________________.
This survey was originally requested to meet USCG Sector Honolulu requirements for mast and rigging inspections on sail-
powered small passenger vessel inspected under 46 CFR Subchapter T per Sector Honolulu Inspection Note #13 dated
__________________.
The method of survey was conducted as follows:
Initial review of the rigging system design and installation
The chain plates and their fastenings to the hulls were examined for wear or deficiencies.
Original, re-used, hardware was Dye Penetration Tested (DPT) tested and inspected with magnification.
The mast column and all shroud/stay connection fittings were examined from mast head to step
The mast compression resistance load path was examined for indications of material or structural failure
Running rigging systems were inspected for wear and proven for operation
The mast and rigging systems were removed and disassembled for USCG inspection at ground level.
Recommendations were made for replacement of various components and general maintenance work to be completed prior
to the vessel returning to passenger service under sail
Final sea trials under sail and rig tuning were conducted to complete this inspection.
Notes on recommendations made for changes, corrections or up-grades to existing systems or structures:
Any recommendations made are drawn directly from component manufacture recommendations, consult with the designer and or
builder of the specific rig or recognized references on boat construction and or rigging including: Norman Skene-Skene’s Elements
of Yacht Design; Larsson & Eliasson-Principles of Yacht Design; Brian Toss-Complete Rigger’s Apprentice; Henderson-
Understanding Rigs and Rigging; and NAVTEC – Rigging Service Guidelines .
Changes or corrections made, requiring USCG recognition and filing are highlighted as such
(NOTICE OF CHANGES/CORRECTIONS MADE FOR USCG RECORDS)
VESSEL DESCRIPTION: (example for illustration only)
______ is a purpose designed and built, motor/sailing, commercial passenger catamaran certificated by the Coast Guard to carry up
to 49 passengers and up to 4 crew on a “Limited Coastwise Route” not more than 20 miles from a harbor of safe refuge. The
vessel hull construction is ____________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
RIGGING DESIGN DESCRIPTION: (example for illustration only)
The rig is a marconi mainsail with twin headsails in a sloop configuration. The deck stepped mast is conventionally stayed, divided
into 3 panels with two sets of (Ø aft rake) spreaders, laterally stayed with upper and intermediate shrouds and twin fore and aft
lower shroud sets. Uppers and intermediates are “continuous” without terminations and nearly parallel to the mast from spreader tip
to chain plate. Fore and aft staying is accomplished continuous twin back stays leading outboard to the aft hulls while twin head
stays are secured (via a link plate) to split bridle legs leading to the foremost bows of the vessel.
Appendix (3) to Enclosure (1) of NVIC 02-16
2
GENERAL INFORMATION:
FILE NUMBER:
FILE # _______________________
RIGGING SURVEY PREPARED FOR: _____________
NAME OF VESSEL:……………………………………………. ______________
PURPOSE FOR SURVEY:…………………………………….... USCG required mast and rigging inspection
YEAR MAKE MODEL OF VESSEL:………………………….. ___________, passenger, aux/sail catamaran
BUILDER:……………………………………………………….. _______________
HOME PORT:…………………………………………………… _______________
OFFICIAL #............................................:……………………….. _______________
USCG CERTIFIED FOR:……………………………………….. Near coastal passenger excursions, 49
passengers, up to 4 crew
OWNER:………………………………………………………… _______________
OWNER’S ADDRESS:…………………………………………. _______________
WHERE INSPECTED:…………………………………………... _______________
SEA TRIALS CONDUCTED…………………………………… Offshore, Waikiki (Ala Wai to Diamond Head)
ATTENDENT AT TIME OF SURVEYS AND SEA TRIALS…. Capt. __________, Operations Manager
LENGTH OVER ALL (L.O.A.):………………………………… ________” (from USCG documentation)
PRIMARY PROPULSION……………....:……………………… Aux/sail, diesel twin screw
GROSS TONNAGE……………………………………………… 37 “ “
NET TONNAGE:………………………………………………… 29 “ “
SAIL AREA………………………………………………………. Not to exceed 1,646 sq ft per COI
ORIGINAL STABILITY LETTER………………………………. #16710, August 2
nd,
1985
MAST/RIGGING DESIGNER MANUFACTURER:…………... Unconfirmed,
Appendix (3) to Enclosure (1) of NVIC 02-16
3
STANDING RIGGING: (example for illustration only)
MAST COLUMN:
(NOTICE OF CORRECTIONS MADE)
Painted (white) , aluminum extrusion, 10” x 6.5”,2 sections sleeved and mechanically fastened. The mast was removed for
inspection (09/07) and re-rigging. An area of corrosion, noted by Mr. Tim Wilcox (USCG) at the heel of the mast was cropped
back to good metal per this surveyor’s recommendations. Inspection was performed on the entire column. Dye Penetrant Testing
(DPT) was conducted on fitting welds at the mast head and in way of the tang through-bolts holes. Other areas of high loading or
compression were closely examined with visual magnification
SPREADERS/ SPREADER ROOTS:
Twin, matching sets of foiled aluminum spreader struts are attached to mast column with dual, fore and aft, SS brackets at the
spreader roots. Brackets are SS machine-screwed to the mast wall. The dissimilar metals appear adequately isolated with very
limited areas of aluminum corrosion noted at/under the brackets. The condition of the brackets and the fastening were closely
examined with no deficiencies noted. The shrouds run fair and vertical in line with the mast while the design of the spreader
brackets ensure that the spreader to wire angle-bisects remain equal on both sets. Custom fittings on the spreader tips entrap the
shrouds from escape.
MAST STEP/PARTNERS:
Compression loads are distributed to a deck-stepped, aluminum mast base. The compression load path below is through the primary,
perpendicular, cross beam bulkhead (2 1/2" thick) laminated structure additionally supported by a fore and aft panel under the mast
step which is “stack laminated” with additional panels laterally. On deck the mast heel saddles a well fastened, close fitting,
aluminum step which was inspected for deterioration and or developing weld failures.
BOOM AND GOOSENECK FITTINGS:
The boom is one continuous extrusion of aluminum, painted white. An acceptable margin of wear was noted on the SS casting and
pivot pins of the gooseneck and with the pivot rod into the boom. Parts were lubricated and cotter pin secured upon re-
commissioning. No internal purchases for out-haul or otherwise are employed here. 4 to 1mainsheet tackle is secured to the boom
with a series of through bolted, SS, bails of adequate size.
CHAIN PLATES AND LINK PLATES
UPPER AND INTERMEDIATE SHROUDS/ Deck level chain plates
(NOTICE OF CHANGES MADE FOR USCG RECORDS)
Existing plates were reportedly original equipment. Renewal was recommended with modification to increase metal gauge to 3/8
from 1/4 “per guidelines published in Skenes Elements of Yacht Design”. The previous, twin plates were also modified to a single
plate from twin, continuous, 1/4 thick straps which were bolted into one another through the main beam bulkhead, with limited
access to the fastenings. New (T-shaped) plates carry the upper and intermediate wires on a single plate and distribute the tensile
loads across an equivalent surface area of the bulkhead. Location was unchanged. The new fastening schedule surpasses previous
bearing capacities. Backing is adequately provided with 1/4" aluminum plate of the same outside dimensions as the T plate base (9”
x 16”). Port and Starboard plates are correctly oriented to the shroud load path. See photo page # 3
JIB BRIDLE PLATES 2:
Reportedly original, stainless steel lugs welded to rectangular plates, fastened with 4 (each) 5/8” bolts, through the bow
compression beam and into the solid, laminated, hardwood bow sections. Lug thickness of 1/2" meets standards for 7/8” pin and
1/2" wire. Welds were inspected with 15x magnification.
NOTE, upon re-stepping the mast it was observed that the load paths of the bridles to the lugs are miss-oriented by a few degrees,
especially on port. It is recommended that is corrected when the mast is next un-stepped for service and maintenance.
JIB BRIDLE TANGS:
These tangs join twin bridles to the bows and twin head stays link plate, reportedly replaced in 2004. Twin, sandwich type, tangs of
1/4, SS plate are used and drilled to accept 7/8 clevis pins on both ends. All tangs were DPT tested, inspected with magnification
Appendix (3) to Enclosure (1) of NVIC 02-16
4
(15 xs) and measured for elongation wear in clevis pin bores. Four of the eight 7/8 clevis pins are original. New pins are on order
and should be installed upon receipt.
FORWARD CROSS BEAM – JIB BRIDLES ATTACHMENT POINTS
(NOTICE OF CHANGES MADE FOR USCG RECORDS)
This beam is an aluminum mast section with internal bracing, providing a mounting platform for jib bridles and pelican striker
plates. Additionally providing a connecting point for longitudinal beams employed in the boarding ladder system. Upon
recommendations, the cross beam was replaced with an equivalent section of aluminum mast column, of equivalent cord, depth and
gauge. This is a recycled mast section with internal reinforcement and bracing applied to the center span and end sections per
original specifications. Fabrication and welding were professionally executed and visually inspected by the USCG and this
surveyor. Re-fastening of the compression beam to the bows is achieved using 4, each, 18”, 5/8, SS lag bolts which are epoxy
bonded into the solid-wood bow sections. This bolting pattern also secures the jib bridle chain plates to the bows. See page # 9
HEAD STAY/BRIDLE LINK PLATE:
(NOTICE OF CHANGES MADE FOR USCG RECORDS)
Newly replaced (09/07) upon surveyor’s recommendations, sized-up from 3/8” thick SS to 1/2" SS, T316, to meet standards
(Skene’s) for 7/8” pin & 1/2” bridle wires. Twin head stay wires are sized at 1/2 with 3/4 clevis pins. See photo page # 10
TWIN BACK STAYS CHAIN PLATES:
Reportedly replaced in 2004. 1/4" thick by 1-5/8” wide, SS straps, bolted through reinforced hull sections near inboard transoms
coupled with external SS backing straps of similar dimensions. Chain plates were MDP dye tested and inspected under
magnification. (See COMMENTS in the following, lower shrouds section on plate gauge). The plates are adequately oriented to
load path in both directions.
FORE AND AFT LOWER SHROUDS CHAIN PLATES:
Reportedly replaced in 2004. 1/4" thick by 1-5/8” thick straps bolted through cabin house and interior hull structure aft and internal
hull structure forward. Chain plates were DPT tested and inspected under magnification.
COMMENTS: The 5/8 pin w/ 3/8 wire sizes would typically call for 3/8 to 7/16 gauge plate. As the loads are split between the two,
fore and aft lower shrouds, bearing on 1/4 gauge chain plates is marginally adequate in this case. The split back stays, with the
same wire and pin size, are similar in that they also divide tensile load bearing on 1/4 thick plates. With the aft lower chain plates,
the lead angle of the plates is poorly oriented to the load path of the shrouds in the lateral angle. It is recommended that all 6 of
these chain plates are replaced with plates of 3/8 thick metal at the clevis pin bore and bent to the correct load path angle when the
mast is next un-stepped from the vessel.
CHAIN PLATES AND LINK PLATES CONTINUED:
FORWARD (PELICAN STRIKER) PLATE:
Reportedly original hardware. 5/8 thick SS lugs welded to 1/4 SS plate, through bolted to forward perpendicular beam. Lugs and
welds were DPT dye tested and inspected under magnification. This fitting is primarily engaged in suspending the forward
compression beam with the pelican stay which joins the head stay link plate.
Chain/link plate bore (elongation) measurements 09/07
Shroud/stay
Wire dia.
Clevis pin dia.
Chain/link/plate/lug gauge
Load line elongation
Upper/cap shroud
3/8
5/8/.6250
3/8
New, Ø wear
Intermediate shroud
3/8
5/8/.6250
3/8
New, Ø wear
Forward lower shroud
3/8
5/8/.6250
1/4
.6400 averaged
Aft lower shroud
3/8
5/8/.6250
1/4
.6450 averaged
Jib bridle chain plate lugs
1/2
7/8/.8600
1/2
.8860
Jib bridle link plate
1/2
7/8/.8600
1/2
New, Ø wear
Pelican striker plate lug
3/8
5/8/.6250
5/8
.6600
Back stays plates
3/8
5/8/.6250
1/4
.6500 averaged
Twin headstay link plate
1/2
3/4/7600
1/2
New, Ø wear
Appendix (3) to Enclosure (1) of NVIC 02-16
5
CHAIN PLATES SUMMARY:
The chain plate leads are well angled to the load paths in both planes except where stated otherwise above. Their mounting points,
hull, cabin side, cross beam, etc were closely inspected for any indications of deterioration or structural deficiencies. Fasteners were
inspected for corrosion, Restoration work was noted in the aft hulls where the back stay chain plates tie in to the hulls. The hull
superstructure appears well preserved and fit to support anticipated rigging tension and mast compression loads.
TURNBUCKLES:
All are open-barrel and toggle with chrome plated bronze barrels and 316 SS strap T-toggles. Turnbuckle studs are wire swage
terminals. All 13 rigging turnbuckles were replaced (09/07).
TANGS AND ATTACHMENTS ALOFT:
(NOTICE OF CHANGES MADE FOR USCG RECORDS)
Upper/lower and intermediate shrouds: Sandwich type, twin 3/16 thick, SS, dual tangs join the upper, intermediate and lower
shrouds to the mast aloft. Tangs were sized-up upon surveyors recommendation from 1/8 to 3/16 gauge SS to reach closer to
standards for 5/8 pin with 3/8 wire loads (newly replaced 09/07). These tangs rest on the shoulders of 3/4 diameter, SS rod running
laterally through the mast wall sections which are .250” thick. No compression tubes are employed here. Original rod stock was 5/8
diameter, sized-up to 3/4 upon surveyor’s recommendations and design.(newly replaced 09/07) The protruding ends of the rods are
threaded (not underneath the tangs) and secured with nuts held captive by cotter pins. Load path orientation of the tangs is as
follows: Upper shrouds (correct) intermediate shrouds (approximately 5 degrees off load path but acceptable) lower shrouds (eye-
jaw toggles on the aft lowers accommodate the staying geometry discrepancies with the lowers which have a wider base angle than
the uppers while they share a single set of tangs aloft, load angle is acceptable. See photo page # 11.
HEADSTAY AND BACK STAY LUG-EYES:
¾” aluminum stock welded to mast-head truck assembly. Lugs and welds were DPT tested and examined with 15x magnification.
An acceptable margin of elongation-wear was measured and noted on the head and backstay lugs. These connection points are
original (32 years old). No indications of weld failure, advanced wear or metal fatigue were noted under dye penetration and close
examination; cyclic wear over 32 years will have an effect on the metal integrity. See photo page # 11.
MAST HEAD BACKSTAY SPLITTER:
Twin backstays join a custom (reportedly built 2004) fitting of 1/4, SS, twin, triangular-plates. Twin 3/8 tangs are welded to these
plates allowing connection to a single eye-jaw toggle which joins the masthead truck with 3/4 clevis pins. Welds were DPT tested
and pin bores were measured for wear. An offset of the clevis pin holes on the fitting causes a minor wire deflection at the splitter.
Replacement with a more appropriately designed fitting is recommended when the mast is next un-stepped from the vessel. See
photo page # 10.
TWIN HEAD STAY SPLITTER PLATES:
Twin, triangular 1/4, SS, plates, (reportedly replaced 2004) bored for 3/4 clevis pins join twin head stays to masthead truck via a
single eye-jaw toggle. Full range of movement is provided for with this configuration. Plates were DPT tested and measured for
wear.
WIRE ROPE, SHROUDS, STAYS AND BRIDLES:
All 316, 1x19, SS wire rope newly replaced 09/09. Wire diameters named above in CHAIN PLATES table.
HALYARDS, SHEETS, TOPPING LIFT:
Halyards replaced (09/07) with equivalent 9/16 braided line to 1/4 7 x 17 wire rope. Topping lift newly replaced (09/07) with
equivalent plastic covered ¼, SS, wire rope. Twin jib halyards are freely suspended from the mast truck with Harken, 100mil
turning blocks to accommodate 9/16 halyards. The main halyard runs through a single internal masthead sheave. All are correctly
sized for service and were proven under sea trial for operation.
RUNNING RIGGING - DECK HARDWARE:
Winch inventory as follows: Main sheet ( Harken, 32-2 speed ST, self tailing) Jib sheets, (2, Harken, 64-2 speed, ST) Halyards, (2,
Barient, single speed, non-tailing on mast). All 5 winches appear well fastened and were proved serviceable upon sea trials. The
halyard winches were not removed from the mast to inspect fastenings!
Appendix (3) to Enclosure (1) of NVIC 02-16
6
Sheets and running lines are all well lead through their running leads. Blocks and deck hardware appear adequately sized and
secured for their service. No deficiencies were noted other than a worn topping lift which is a 2 part tackle on the boom needing
replacement.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION: (example for illustration only)
__________________has been effectively restored in terms of (her mast staying hardware only) as of _______________. The
scope of this survey report is comprehensive and should meet all criteria for determining “fitness for intended service” for
this commercial passenger vessel operating within the limitations of her C.O.I. The recommendations for replacement or
renewal of deck hardware should be tended to during the next, mast out, inspection cycle in 6 years. Other minor
recommendations should be accomplished in a timely manner.
Guidelines for mast and rigging inspection, maintenance and component replacement are
drawn from recommendations made by NAVTEC SERVICE GUIDELINES.
Including:
Annual: comprehensive, mast standing, inspection of mast and rigging system with rigging slacked off,
turnbuckles opened and lubricated and rigging tension re-tuned.
Six year cycles: Mast removal and disassembly of all components for comprehensive inspection.
Replacement of stainless fittings every 5 to 10 years for vessels operating in the tropics.
General inspection of rigging equipment by vessel’s crew several times per year.
Surveyor’s recommendations include:
Monthly general inspections by crew using a check list tailored to the vessel’s rigging systems.
Weekly cleaning and thorough rinsing of all rigging hardware at deck level.
Annual comprehensive inspection by qualified rigging surveyor which may include sea trials of the vessel under normal
loading conditions in typical weather circumstances. To include, also: backing off rigging tension, removal of hardware
where possible for inspection of chain plates, stem fittings, toggles, etc, updating of ship’s (recommended) rigging
maintenance log.
Commercial vessels must be equipped with an efficient rigging cable cutting device. This device should be maintained in
good operating condition and stored in an accessible location. Testing of such device with cable of equivalent dimension to
the vessel’s standing rigging should be practiced.
Captain and crew should be trained and annually reviewed in: methods of safely going aloft, understanding and
recognizing the early signs of hardware failure, proper rigging maintenance procedures, and appropriate response to
rigging related emergencies or failures.
DISCLAIMER: (optional and normally found in commercial third party survey)
This report is the unbiased perspective of the undersigned surveyor, not to be considered a warranty or guarantee against mast or
rigging failure either specified or implied. All components named in this report were closely inspected by this surveyor
exclusively.
Note that: marine hardware (stainless steel and aluminum) failures can develop without visual indication. Therefore,
diligent maintenance, proper use, frequent inspections and replacement of questionable or aged hardware are the best lines
of defense against mast/rigging failures.
Signature and Date of person or persons responsible for the rigging survey: _____________________________________
Appendix (4) to Enclosure (1) of NVIC 02-16
THIRD PARTY RIGGING SURVEY (SAMPLE B)
1
REPORT OF MARINE SURVEY
Auxiliary Coastal Trading Schooner
( )
FILE # ( )
Spars and Rigging Survey
for USCG –COI
Dates Of Survey Inspections
•
Original, in-water rigging
•
Jan. 26, 2009
Second, out of water, dry-dock
•
March 17, 2009
Re-commissioning work-list
•
May 8-9, 2009
Completed commissioning survey with USCG, MSS3
( ) for COI credit
•
June 12, 2009
Final spars, standing and running rigging inspection
while the vessel was hauled for dry-dock
•
Dec. 23, 2009
Vessel Information
•
Official #
•
Hull #
•
Same
Year Built
•
Feb. 14, 1945
Location
•
.
Builder
•
Principle Dimensions
•
Register length
•
59’ 9”
Sparred length
•
70’ est
Beam
•
15’ 5”
Depth
•
8’ 4” est
Net Tons
•
28 reported
Displacement
•
85,770 lbs
reported
Hailing Port
•
.
SCOPE OF INSPECTIONS CONDUCTED
• Main, foremast, bowsprit & main-topmast were stripped to wood for inspection
and repairs as necessary as cataloged in the body of this report
• Bowsprit heel was cropped away and replaced over a length of 50%
(approximately) of the run with 12/1 ratio lamination
• Spar appendages, spreaders, cross-tress, trestle trees, gaff booms, hounds, mast
trucks etc, were replaced or restored as necessary
• The entire standing/staying rigging gang was replaced
• All mast hardware, bands, rings, gammon, and kranse irons were sand-blast
stripped and restored or replaced as necessary. All
cases of elongated bore for
shackles or clevis pins were weld-filled and re-drilled to correct tolerances.
All metal was re-galvanized and painted with appropriate marine coatings
• Bow-stem fitting was replaced anew with new fasteners
• All running rigging was replaced anew
• Blocks and tackle were replaced or professionally restored as necessary
• Ratlines and climbing gear were replaced anew
• Spars and appendages were refinished with marine coatings
Notice of vessel modifications from original rigging plan associated with the
vessel's previous, expired Certificate of inspection for USCG records.
All changes to the rigging system were directed by Capt. ( ) to improve
the staying system. Significant changes were discussed and reviewed with
USCG Inspection staff and the Undersigned surveyor, as follows:
• Fixed aft/cap shrouds were fitted to the foremast to improve foremast after-
staying configuration. Equivalent chain plates and fastening were utilized at
deck level
• The superior bob-stay chain was fitted with a dolphin striker-strut to open the
staying angle of the stay from the stem to the outer bob-stay kranse iron to
decrease the loads exerted by the jib-stay onto the bow. The previous angle
was too shallow and generating more compression than support.
Photo of vessel
Appendix (4) to Enclosure (1) of NVIC 02-16
2
Abbreviations noted in table below:
WØ- wire diameter
PIN - shackle or turnbuckle pin diameter
SH– shackle size
P/S - parceling and service
TB - turnbuckle
Galv - galvanized wire
SS - stainless steel wire or fitting
Component
Age
Comments
Requested By
•
Address
•
RIG COMPONENT
TYPE
WØ
SH
TB
PIN
P/S
AGE
COMMENTS
Main shrouds fore & aft pair
Galv 7X19
5/8
3/4
1”
7/8
Yes
7/09
Increased wire size from 9/16 to 5/8
Main topmast cap shrouds
SS 7/19
3/8
1/2
3/4
5/8
Yes
7/09
No changes to original rig (Ø change)
Mainmast running backs
SS 7/19
1/2
5/8
NA
NA
Yes
7/09
Ø change
Main-topmast running backs
SS 7/19
3/8
1/2
NA
NA
Yes
7/09
Ø change
Main-topmast forestay
SS 1/19
3/8
5/8
3/4
5/8
No
7/09
Ø change
Triadic (main to foremast)
SS 1/19
3/8
1/2
3/4
3/4
No
7/09
Ø change
Foremast lower shrouds fore &
aft pair
Galv 7X19
5/8
3/4
1”
7/8
Yes
7/09
Increased wire size from 9/16 to 5/8
Foremast after cap shrouds pair
Galv 7/19
5/8
3/4
1”
7/8
Yes
7/09
Modification to system (see notes, page ?)
Foremast shrouds on spreaders
SS 7/19
3/8
1/2
3/4
5/8
Yes
7/09
Ø change
Bowsprit whisker guys
SS 7/19
1/2
5/8
3/4
NA
Yes
7/09
Ø change
Bowsprit foot rope wire
SS 7/19
3/8
1/2
NA
NA
Yes
7/09
Ø change
Bowsprit superior bob-stay
chain
Galv chain
9/16
7/8
7/8
7/8
No
7/09
Modification to system (see notes, page #)
Bowsprit inferior bob-stay
chain
Galv chain
9/16
7/8
7/8
7/8
No
7/09
Improved connection to kranse iron aft of
dolphin striker strut
Jib Stay
SS 1/19
1/2
NA
3/4
3/4
No
7/09
Jibstay aloft: swaged stud & turnbuckle w/
3/4” double jaw toggle. A-low: swaged
marine eye & 7/8” DJT (7/8 galv bolt thru
kranse)
Fore Stay
SS 1/19
1/2
NA
3/4
3/4
No
7/09
Same as above with 7/8” eye jaw toggle
a-low
Rigging System Inventory & Information:
Appendix (4) to Enclosure (1) of NVIC 02-16
3
Mainmast
Orig.
Mast was stripped to wood and inspected by the undersigned and USCG prior to repairs
and refinishing. Areas of soft wood were cropped and restored prior to recoating with
appropriate marine finishes
Main Trestle Cheeks
Orig.
Removed and inspected prior to refinishing and improved re-application. Mast section
rebates were surfaced and bedded prior to joining trestle cheeks. Bedding compounds used
in all applications throughout restoration project
Main Trestle Trees
7/09
Replaced with purple heart hardwood timbers. Dimensions increased to allow for
improved fastenings. Sacrificial hardwood bolsters were added to trestle tops to shoulder
shrouds and halyard stops to prevent wear on trestle edges
Main Crosstrees
7/09
Replaced with purple heart timbers. Dimensions increased to allow for improved
fastenings.
Main Topmast
Orig.
Topmast was stripped to wood. Inspected by marine surveyor and USCG. Wood rot was
noted at mast, heel-rope hole. Heel of mast was cropped away with replacement of section
on 12/1 ratio. Heel rope opening adjusted to improve ease of lowering the topmast. New
purple heart truck installed. Improved suspension of topmast head halyard block
Mainmast Spreaders
7/09
Newly fabricated of purple heart. Dimensions were slightly increased, spreader roots were
also increased in cross-section to allow for improved fastening. Brass bushings were
installed in spreader roots to prevent wear on axis bolts. Spreader tips were also increased
in dimension to provide better grip on cap shrouds.
Mainmast Hardware
Futtock Shrouds
Orig.
Futtock-rods were reused while their crosstree brackets were renewed. UHMW plastic
runners were installed on bracket ends to prevent chafe on undersides of spreaders.
Mainmast Cap Ring
Orig.
Blasted clean for inspection. Elongated pin bores were welded closed and re-drilled to
tolerance. Mast cap thru-bolt diameter increased to 3/4”. Mast was sleeved in way of the
thru-bolt with brass tubing and bedded.
Triadic Bail
7/09
Bail was increased in gauge to 1/2 rod with 3/8 lugs at mast cap thru-bolt
Main Peak Halyard Band
Orig.
Cleaned/inspected, pin-fastener bores tolerance confirmed or corrected, re-galv and
painted.
Trestle Trees Bracket
7/09
Improved main-topmast system (see photos page 5)
Peak Halyard Hardware
7/09
Removed from original configuration (eyebolts thru trestles and cross trees) Now slung
over bolsters on leathered wire strops
Quarter Lift Hardward
7/09
Same as above
Main Topmast
Orig.
Topmast heel was cropped away to remove a section of rot which originated at the heel
rope thru-mast hole. New section was scarfed in with required 12/1overlap using epoxy
resin adhesive. Topmast running blocks were we slung from the spar allowing for ease of
lowering. A lateral square hole was bored into the mast heel at the trestles to allow using a
proper fid to stand the topmast onto. The new fid is of adequate cross section and built of
purple heart. Fid is also held captive as it is double-notched into the trestles and to its own
undersides. Finally secured with lashings. (significant improvement over original design)
Appendix (4) to Enclosure (1) of NVIC 02-16
4
Foremast
Mast was stripped to wood and inspected by the undersigned and USCG prior to repairs
and refinishing. (found in generally good condition) An area of damage where the gaff
jaws (un-leathered) bore away at the soft wood in the full hoist elevation on the fore part
of the spar was cropped and renewed. Other areas of wood damage where spreader
hardware and mast bands had been allowed to compress toward deck was cropped and
renewed accordingly. Improved shouldering on the spar to support hardware was
employed. Finally, as stated on page one, after-cap shrouds were added to the rig to
achieve superior back-staying to the fore-rig.
Foremast Spreaders
7/09
Re-configured, purple heart, spreaders were installed. Numerous deficiencies to the
previous system were corrected with this modification including: The shrouds now have a
clear path to deck and not in compression contact with the spreader roots as previously.
The recess into the fore/aft face of the spar was improved to support the new spreader
bows. Refastening was accomplished with improved fastening schedule. Spreader tips are
increased in cross section to provide a better grip on the cap shrouds. Cap shrouds are held
captive in tips on protective copper covering strips.
Foremast Hounds
7/09
Remade with purple heart and installed into fortified rebates into mast sides. Previously
the hounds were found creeping to deck with failed fasteners and poor insets into the spar.
Foremast Spreader Lifts
7/09
(1/4” SS wire rope) Installed similar to original but with improved spreader tip fastening
Foremast Hardware
Age
Comments
Foremast Cap Ring
Orig.
Cap ring was blasted clean, inspected, elongated bores were filled and drilled to correct
tolerance. Metal was re-galvanized and coated
Foremast Peak Halyard Rings
Orig.
Upper and lower bands/rings were treated as similar to the above statement
Foremast Spreader Hardware
Mixed
New fasteners used throughout. Spreader brackets reused.
Bow Sprit
Orig.
Bowsprit heel was found rotted in way of the Sampson post and in areas under the
gammon iron. Heel was cropped away and renewed with a scarfed in section of Douglas
fir on the required 12/1 ratio. Epoxy glued and thru-bolt fastened on adequate spacing.
Soft wood under outer and inner cranse irons was treated prior to refinishing
Bow Sprit Hardware
Mixed
Outer cranse iron ring was blasted clean, inspected, elongated bores were filled and drilled
to correct tolerance. Metal was re-galvanized and coated. The inner kranse iron ring was
modified to achieve more surface area of grip on the bow sprit. Previously the iron was
being drawn deeply, on an angle into the chamfered shoulders of the sprit. The new ring is
longer (fore/aft) and allows for the addition of a dolphin striker strut to be employed in the
head rigging. Four thru-bolts provide adequate clamping power on the sprit. The gammon
iron was also treated as stated above prior to reinstallation
Sprit Hardware Continued
Mixed
Sprit whiskers tangs were remade anew of bronze with the connecting lugs oriented on an
improved axis. The tangs were thru-fastened into repaired topsides with adequate backing
“ “
7/09
Bow stem head fitting was made anew and refastened into restored wood on the stem with
adequately backed fastenings
Gaff Spars And Booms
All were stripped to wood and inspected by the undersigned and USCG prior to repairs
and refinishing, (found in generally good condition) with the exception of the foresail gaff
where rot and termites had destroyed the gaff jaw end of the spar. The gaff was renewed
with improvements to the jaw. All hardware was reinstalled with renewed fasteners and
proper bedding compounds
Appendix (4) to Enclosure (1) of NVIC 02-16
5
Chain Plates
Mixed
Vessel records and correspondence with the vessel’s previous shipwright confirmed that
the chain plates were pulled, inspected, clevis pin bores corrected to tolerance, hot-dipped
galvanized and reinstalled with new fasteners approximately 10 years ago. The plates
were inspected by the MS and USCG while the rig was out of the boat. No deficiencies
were noted. Two new, similar chain plates were installed on port and starboard for the
new foremast after/cap shroud set installed with the re-commissioned rig.
Turnbuckles & Equip.
7/09
All renewed with this re-commissioned rig. Correctly sized to loads, toggled where
required and secured with seizing
Running Gear
Mixed
Each of the blocks employed in the running rigging system were disassembled, rebuilt and
or replaced with either better designed or better installed (fairleads) equipment. Attention
to fair leading was paid as there were numerous mis-leads in the previous system. New
shackles were used throughout the system.
Running Rigging
7/09
All of the running rigging was replaced anew. 3-strand, Dacron line was employed. All
lines were noted correctly reeved for their service with thimbled splices where called for
Main/Fore Quarter-lifts
7/09
Boom lifts were significantly improved with correct tackle and mast suspension system
Deck Hardware
Mixed
All inspected for fairleads, fasteners and backing. Any deficiencies were corrected
Ratlines
7/09
Renewed and nicely fitted/installed
Main Boom Gallows
Orig.
Deck level foundation was restored under gallows stands and on cap-rail/bulwarks. The
gallows was reinstalled with new fasteners and well backed below decks.
Survey Summary:
The restoration and re-commissioning of the spars and rigging systems aboard the schooner
( ) were conducted under the oversight and direction of Master Rigger, Capt. ( ),
while much of the actual physical construction was conducted by ( ) with assistance
from apprentice riggers. All spars and wooden appendages were restored / re-fabricated by, or
under the direction of, Master Shipwright, ( ) and Ship’s Carpenter, ( ).
The restoration process was monitored by the undersigned surveyor and USCG, Marine
Inspector, ( ). All modifications were addressed according to USCG protocol for T-Class
Vessels with prior review by the undersigned and Mr. ( ). Upon commissioning, the
standing and running rigging systems were inspected by the parties named above. Sea Trials
were conducted and all systems, reportedly, performed satisfactorily.
The vessel was inspected for this report by the undersigned surveyor to meet
requirements for USCG Passenger Vessel Certification and to qualify for insurance
coverage.
Surveyor’s Statement:
In accordance with the request for a marine survey of the sailing vessel “( )” for the
purpose of evaluating her present condition and fitness for passenger service, I hereby submit
my conclusions based on the preceding report. The subject vessel was personally inspected by
the undersigned on the dates named in this report.
Conclusion:
The statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct. The reported analyses,
opinions and conclusions are my personal unbiased, professional analyses, assumptions and
limited conclusions.
I have no present or prospective in
terest in the vessel that is the subject of the report and I have
no personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved.
Appendix (4) to Enclosure (1) of NVIC 02-16
6
My compensation is not contingent upon the reporting of a predetermined value or direction in
value that favors the cause of the client, or the attainment of a stipulated result, or occurrence
of a subsequent event.
Disclosure:
No warranty or guarantee, expressed, or implied, is made as to conditions of equipment,
hull, gear or any other item or aspect of the vessel, other than as stated herein and as
observed at the time of the survey dates noted in this report.
Appendix (5) to Enclosure (1) of NVIC 02-16
RECOMMENDED REFERENCES
1
These recommended references were compiled through Coast Guard interaction with industry partners and
on-line research. Almost all, including historic reprints are readily available new and or used through
various on-line purchasing venues.
GENERAL
1. Skene’s Elements of Yacht Design by Francis S. Kinney
ISBN 0-399-15004-8
2. Principles of Yacht Design by Lars Larsson & Rolf E Eliasson
ISBN 0-07135-393-3
3. The Complete Rigger’s Apprentice by Brion Toss
ISBN 0-07064-840-9
4. Surveying Small Craft by Ian Nicholson
ISBN 0-924486-58-9
5. The Boater’s Guide to Corrosion by Everett Collier
ISBN 0-07-155019-4
6. The Sailing Dictionary by Joachim Schult
ISBN 0-924486-37-6
7. Surveying Fiberglass Sailboats by Henry C. Mustin
ISBN 0-87742-347-4
8. Inspecting the Aging Sailboat by Don Casey
ISBN 0-07-013394-8
9. Cordage Institute
http://www.ropecord.com/cart/cartpubs.asp
10. Handbook of Fibre Rope Technology by H.A. McKenna, J.W.S. Hearle, N. O’Hear
ISBN-10: 1855736063
11. Federal Specification RR-W-410-G; Wire Rope and Strand - 20June2010
http://www.loosco.com/resource-library/specifications/index.php
12. Naval Ships Technical Manual Chapter 613 – Wire and Fiber Rope and Rigging
U.S. Department of Defense.
13. Wire Rope User’s Manual, 2
nd
Edition
Wire Rope Technical Board
14. West Coast Wire Rope Guide
West Coast Wire Rope and Rigging, Inc.
http://www.wcwr.com/home/catalog
15. Line: Tying it up, Tying it down by Jan Adkins
ISBN – 10: 0937822833
16. The Marlinspike Sailor by Hervey Garrett Smith
ISBN-10: 0070592187
17. Moving Heavy Objects by Jan Adkins
ISBN – 10: 0937822825
18. The Ashley Book of Knots by Clifford W. Ashley
ISBN-10: 0385040253
19. The Complete Book of Knots by Geoffery Budworth
ISBN-10: 1558216324
Appendix (5) to Enclosure (1) of NVIC 02-16
2
20. Handbook of Seaman’s Ropework by Sam Svenson
ISBN-10: 0229117074
21. Splicing Wire and Fiber Rope by R. Graumont
ISBN-10: 0870331183
22. The Sailmaker’s Apprentice: A guide for the self reliant sailor by Emiliano Marino
ISBN-10: 0071376429
CONTEMPORARY
1. Rigging Service Guidelines by Navtec Rigging Solutions
www.navtecriggingsolutions.com.
2. Guidelines for Design and Constructruction of Large Modern Yacht Rigs
Germanisher Lloyd
http://www.gl-group.com/infoServices/rules/pdfs/gl_i-4-2_e.pdf
3. Guidelines for the Type Approval of Carbon Strand and PBP Cable Rigging for Sailing Yachts
Germanisher Lloyd
http://www.gl-group.com/infoServices/rules/pdfs/gl_i-4-3_e.pdf
4. Understanding Rigs and Rigging by Richard Henderson
ISBN 0-87746-383-4
5. Hall Spars and Rigging – Deck Set Up; Mast Tuning and Care; Mast and Vang Manuals
http://www.hallspars.com/category_s/2231.htm
6. Cruising Rigs and Rigging by Ross Norgrove
ISBN-10: 087742155
TRADITIONAL
1. Tall Ship Rigs by Germanischer Lloyd
http://www.gl-group.com/infoServices/rules/pdfs/gl_i-4-1_e.pdf
2. Guidelines for the Maintenance and Inspection of Tall Ship Rigs by Germanischer Lloyd
http://www.gl-group.com/infoServices/rules/pdf/gl_i-4-4_e.pdf
3. ABS Rules for Building and Classing Wood Vessels, 1942
American Bureau of Shipping
4. Hand, Reef and Steer – Traditional Sailing Skills for Classic Boats by Tom Cunliffe
ISBN-10: 1574092035
5. The Gaff Rig Handbook: History, Techniques, Developments by John Leather
6. The American Fishing Schooners: 1825-1935 by Howard I. Chapelle
ISBN-10: 039303755X
7. Auxiliary Sail Vessel Operations for the Aspiring Professional Sailor by G. Andy Chase
ISBN 0-87033-493-X
8. EAGLE Seamanship, 4
th
Edition: A Manual for Square Rigger Sailors
CAPT. Eric C. Jones, USCG; LT Christopher Nolan, USCG
ISBN-10: 1591146313
HISTORIC
1. Wooden Ship: The building of a wooden sailing vessel in 1870 by Jan Adkins
ISBN-10: 0395264499
Appendix (5) to Enclosure (1) of NVIC 02-16
3
2. The Art of Rigging by George Biddlecombe
ISBN-10: 0486263434
3. The Kedge-Anchor or Young Sailors’ Assistant by William Brady
ISBN-10: 0486419924
4. The Rigger’s Guide and Seaman’s Assistant by Charles Bushell
ISBN-10: 1130901580
5. American Merchant Seaman’s Manual – 1942 by Felix M. and Allan Hoffman Cornell
6. The Seaman’s Friend – A treatise on practical seamanship by Richard Henry Dana Jr.
ISBN-10: 048629918X
7. Seamanship in the Age of Sail by John Harland
ISBN-10: 08070219553
8. The Young Sea Officer’s Sheet Anchor: Or a key to the leading of rigging and to practical
seamanship by Darcy Lever
ISBN-10: 0486402207
9. Seamanship by George S. Nares
ISBN-10: 1145057748
10. Steel’s Elements of Mastmaking, Sailmaking and Rigging by D.R. Steel
11. Masting and Rigging: The Clipper Ship & Ocean Carrier by Harold A. Underhill
ISBN-10: 0851741738
OTHER:
1. Wire Splicing Instructions
Jamie White – Director, Texas Seaport Museum
http://www.flckr.com/photos/squarerigger/sets/72157600183894973/with/4868979/
2. How to Worm, Parcel and Serve
Wesley Heerssen, Captain, US Brig NIAGARA
http://brigniagara.wordpress.com/2008/11/05/learn-how-to-worm-parcel-and-serve-20-min-video/
3. How to Turn in a Fiber Seizing
http://brigniagara.wordpress.com/2006/11/18/a-quick-and-dirty-seizing-in-eight-minutes/
Appendix (6) to Enclosure (1) of NVIC 02-16
Preventative Maintenance Cleaning for Stainless Steel Rigging Components
1
This information was compiled through Coast Guard interaction with industry partners and other research sources. It
is specific to industry experience with stainless steel hardware typically used for standing and running rigging
including wire rope, end terminals, chain plates, mast tangs and associated anchoring or tensioning devices in
inspected sail vessels. Absent specific regulations, this enclosure is informational.
PROPERTIES/CHARACTERISTICS OF STAINLESS STEEL MARINE HARDWARE: It is well recognized
that (300 series) stainless steel alloys, typically used in sail-rigging hardware, are prone to premature deterioration
under prolonged exposure to corrosive, air or water borne, chemical compounds and/or oxygen depriving surface
contaminates. While 316 series stainless steel alloys typically exhibit superior corrosion resistance to surface
contaminates, they are also vulnerable to premature deterioration when corrosive/acidic surface contaminates and/or
accumulations of oxygen depriving particulates are allowed to accumulate.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS: Airborne chemical compounds released by the burning of carbon based,
fuels are known to contribute to the corrosive environment affecting marine hardware. Elevated, ambient temperature
and concentrations of water salinity, typically associated with the tropical latitudes, are also known to accelerate the
corrosive process. When these types of contaminants combine with salinity from sea air moisture for a period of time,
conditions are right to accelerate deterioration in metallic standing rigging systems.
CLEANING: Industry literature suggests cleaning, as simple as regular rinsing with fresh water, be part of a routine
maintenance to reduce the build-up of corrosive surface contaminants and increase rigging service life. Cleaning also
facilitates the inspection process. Frequent cleansing combined with regular inspection are industry recommended
best practices. See Navtec Rigging Service Guidelines.
There are two schools of thought on cleaning. The first is that spots or trails of discoloration can show where
developing or existing problems are located. After the initial inspection, cleaning should be done, to see under the
dirt, including any areas that may need further attention. The second school of thought is that all rigging should be
cleaned before routine (level A) inspection. Cleaning exposes cracks or other anomalies that may be hidden under
even mildly corroded surfaces, thereby allowing a more fair and accurate assessment to take place. In either strategy,
the cleaning process itself also forces close up examination, creating better awareness of standing rigging components
and their condition in service.
NOTE: Best practices in the industry recommend against cleaning with caustic solvents, liquid penetrants or
aggressive “rust busting” agents. Similarly, the use of highly abrasive pads, wire brushes or tools that will score the
surface of stainless steel wire or rigging components should be avoided.
THE INSPECTION PROCESS: When inspecting wire cables, look carefully for signs of corrosion, cracks, pitting
and discolored strands. Rust on the wire cables and all associated hardware is caused by salinity from sea air moisture
or spray. After a short period of time, it is not uncommon for a reddish brown rust film to begin to appear on the wire
or rigging components, referred to as “rougeing” in the Navtec Rigging Service Guidelines. When coupled with other
air contaminants, it will create a glue-like rusty grime. If allowed to accumulate, hose water or rain will not remove
this rusty grime; it must be cleaned off manually to avoid further deterioration which will only get worse if left
unattended over time. Periodic active cleaning and maintenance of standing rigging will slow and may even prevent
the process from taking hold, thereby increasing the service life of the standing rigging system in general. Such
practice will also help to troubleshoot problematic areas of concern and maintain the standing rigging system through
its full life cycle.
NOTE: Discoloration or corrosion in stainless steel can also be a by-product of the quality of the alloy, or
introduced by tooling used during swaging of wire cable or straightening of rod rigging. Photographic records
should be kept as part of a rigging log for review and analysis over time.
Appendix (7) to Enclosure (1) of NVIC 02-16
TYPICAL STAINLESS STEEL CABLE END FITTINGS
1
Swaged Fittings: Swaged fittings are cold pressed onto the cable with purpose built
equipment that applies a specified pressure which results in a uniform compression to
within a specified diameter range based on cable size. Swaging is a one-time event.
T
Check: Swaged fittings should always be straight and installed properly aligned with the
rig. Evidence of bends, excessive corrosion, broken wire strands at the fitting entrance,
fractures or elongation of the clevis pin hole are all cause for close-up inspection, NDT
and or renewal.
Swageless Fittings: Swageless fittings are mechanical fittings designed to be field
assembled. Common trade names include Norseman, Sta-Lok and Hayne.
Thnt
Check
Check: Evidence of excessive corrosion, water intrusion, fracture or improper assembly
are all cause for disassembly, close-up inspection, NDT and or renewal. Cones should be
replaced upon re-assembly. Refer to manufacturer’s recommendations for details.
Toggles: These fittings are used to absorb non-linear loads between chainplates or mast
tangs and turnbuckles or end fittings to allow load forces to align with shroud/stay angles
to reduce fatigue.
Check: Evidence of excessive corrosion, incorrectly sized or bent clevis pins; worn or
oval pin holes; deteriorated, broken or missing cotter pins are all cause for disassembly,
close-up inspection, NDT and or renewal.
Typical grade 316 swage eye to terminate
stainless steel rigging wire. May also be fork
end or combined with a toggle or turnbuckle.
Typical swageless grade 316 threaded eye
fitting with socket and renewable cone
visible.
Typical grade 316 Double Jaw Toggle.
Appendix (8) to Enclosure (1) of NVIC 02-16
CORROSION INSPECTION POINTS
1
• Chainplates – deck penetrations and/or hidden
surfaces
• Chainplate fasteners
• Any place that there are stress concentrations
• Dissimilar metal couplings
• All wire end fittings, mechanical and swage alike
• Stem fittings and fastenings
• Mast Steps
• Welds – Inter-granular corrosion where heat has
changed the structure of stainless and carbides have
precipitated on the surface
• Under winch bases and their mounting hardware
• Bonding/Lightning protection systems
• Bowsprit stem fittings
• Catamarans - The forestay load path and attachment
to the hulls, including but not limited to bridles, gull
stays and the bow tube or beam arrangements
Appendix (9) to Enclosure (1) of NVIC 02-16
PATHWAYS TO SPAR & RIGGING FAILURE
(Not Including Operator Error)
1
• ORDINARY OR EXTRA-ORDINARY WEAR,
FATIGUE
(accumulated or accelerated “work-cycles” on components)
• MODIFICATIONS TO SYSTEM
(w/o understanding engineering or potential consequences)
• ORDINARY OR ACCELERATED CORROSION
(dissimilar metals, environmental, stray current, wood rot)
• DEFERRED OR POOR MAINTENANCE PRACTICES
(lack of comprehension, negligence, available funds)
• POOR FABRICATION
(incorrect materials, assembly, product anomalies, defects)
• IMPACT TO SYSTEM
(collision, lightning strike, severe knockdown, jibes “bad docking
day”)
Appendix (10) to Enclosure (1) of NVIC 02-16
WOOD SPAR GRADE STANDARDS
1
This information was compiled through Coast Guard interaction with industry partners and on-line research.
Absent specific regulations, it should be used as a guide rather an absolute mandate and applied with
discretion. Sources are historically based “rules of thumb” from government published standards or private
resources and still considered good marine practice in the wood spar building trade today. The spar’s use
and place in the rig should also be considered. Defects in gaffs, booms and yards where loading is likely to
be uneven may be more critical than masts that are largely in compression.
- MATERIAL
• Cut from live/green Douglas Fir or Spruce;
• Free from defects including but not limited to shakes, cracks, hollow butts or tops; pitch seams, bark
inclusions, scars, rot, insects, insect/borer damage, nails, spikes or foreign material and holes – open
or plugged; and
• Be close grained with an average ring count of not less than 6 rings per inch measured from the
center of the heartwood to the outer edge of the sapwood at both ends.
- KNOTS
• No large or unsound/decayed knots, ring knots, knot clusters. Sound, tight knots are permissible but
shall not exceed ¼ the diameter of the spar at the location of the knot. Knots if allowed should be
avoided in areas of known stress, such as steps, gaff or boom ends, etc.; and
• No ring knots permitted if the series of knots occur within a 6 inch length of the spar and the sum of
the knot diameters is more than 1/3 of the diameter at that point.
- SPIRAL GRAIN
• Should be avoided whenever possible. The grain should not visually twist more than one inch over
12 inches. A complete twist is 360 degrees. Maximum allowable twist is as follows:
Length Maximum Twist
25 – 35 feet 1 complete twist in 20 feet
40 – 50 feet 1 complete twist in 30 feet
55 feet or longer 1 complete twist in 40 feet
- CRACKS: Are fractures perpendicular to the grain, a sign of failure and not acceptable
- CHECKS: Are separations parallel to the grain and part of the natural drying process. They are generally
not of concern unless they threaten to continue through the thickness of the spar or are located such that
water retention is problematic or has otherwise impacted spar integrity.
Note: Spars with checks should be examined closely in service for evidence of movement or undue flexing
when under strain. Checks open to the weather should be the subject of regular maintenance as well as
close up visual examination and or sounding to detect early signs of rot.